Patna High CourtCWJC/4627/2014dfd for non appearance

Dayanand Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-01-11Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4627 of 2014 ====================================================== Dayanand Singh, son of Late Kapildeo Singh, Resident of Village & Post Office Mahua, Police Station Mahua, District Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Transport, Government of Bihar, India.

2. The Chairman, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bihar, Patna.

3. The State Transport Authority through Secretary Nirman Bhawan, Patna.

4. The Chairman, North Bihar Regional Transport Authority, Muzaffarpur.

5. The Joint Transport Commissioner-cum-Secretary, North Bihar Regional Transport Authority, Muzaffarpur.

6. The District Magistrate, Vaishali.

7. Dy. Collector, Officer In-charge Revenue, Vaishali, Hazipur.

8. District Transport Officer, Vaishali, Hazipur.

9. Vinod Ram, son of Shri Shakaldeep Ram, Village Alipur, Police Station Mahua, District Vaishali.

10. Pawan Kumar Jha, son of Shri Mahakant Jha, at Jandaha, Police Station Jandaha, District Vaishali.

11. Dinesh Sah, son of Yusuf Sah, Village Samaspur, Police Station Mahua, District Vaishali.

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : None For Respondent Nos. 6 to 8: Mr. Rabindra Kr. Priyadarshi, AC to AAG 21 For Respondent No.9 : Mr. Navendu Kumar, Advocate For Respondent No.10 : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, Advocate For Respondent No.11 : Mr. Randhir Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 11-01-2016 None appears on behalf of the petitioner when the matter is repeatedly called.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 9 appears and makes submission that the final order dated 15.10.2015 passed in Transport Revision No. 20 of 2013 has been made the subject matter of CWJC No. 18361 of 2015. It is, therefore, submitted that the writ petition itself has become infructuous.

Patna High Court CWJC No.4627 of 2014 (2) dt.11-01-2016 2/2

3. Be that as it may, in view of the non-appearance of the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/- U