Ramakant Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15968 of 2015 ====================================================== 1.

Ramakant Singh Son of Udit Singh.

2.

Shivjee Singh Son of Udit Singh.

3.

Deo Nath Singh Son of Sital Singh.

4.

Bidya Nand Singh Son of Udit Singh.

All Residents of Village - Sital Bhakurahar, P.O. - Mani Bhakurahar, P.S. - Sarai, District - Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Additional Collector, Vaishali.

3.

Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Hajipur, District - Vaishali. 4.

Anchal Adhikari, Lalganj, P.S. and Anchal Lalganj, District - Vaishali. 5.

Vijay Kumar Singh son of Late Surendra Prasad Singh 6.

Raj Kishore Singh son of Late Surendra Prasad Singh 7.

Shyam Kishore Singh son of Late Surendra Nath Singh 8.

Pramila Devi Daughter of Late Surendra Prasad Singh 9.

Most Chhathia Devi widow of Late Surendra Prasad Singh null 10.

Most. Pramila Devi Wife of Late Ram Darash Singh null 11.

Ajit Kumar Son of Late Ram Darash Singh null 12.

Chandan Kumar Son of Late Ram Darash Singh null 13.

Nilam Kumari Daughter of Late Ram Darash Singh null 14.

Bimal Kumari Daughter of Late Ram Darash Singh null 15.

Sadhana Kumari Daughter of Late Ram Darash Singh null 16.

Chanchal Kumari Daughter of Late Ram Darash Singh null 17.

Binda Singh, Son of Ram Chailitar Singh All residents of Village - Sital Bhakurahar, P.O. - Mani Bhakurahar, P.S. - Sarai, District - Vaishali. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the State :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy No.1, SC-13.

For the Pvt. Res.

:

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Chaudhary, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 08-09-2023 No one appears on behalf of petitioners even after

Patna High Court CWJC No.15968 of 2015(3) dt.08-09-2023 2/2 repeated calls, however, learned counsel for the State, counsel for the private respondents are present.

2. It transpires from the previous order dated 28.08.2023 that as a matter of last indulgence this case was adjourned with direction that if no one shall appear on behalf of petitioners then appropriate order shall be passed on the next date. Today also no one appears on behalf of petitioners.

3. In this background, it transpires to this Court that petitioners have no interest to pursue this case, therefore, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed for default due to nonprosecution. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) ravishankar/- U