Santosh Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16722 of 2015 ====================================================== 1.

Santosh Kumar Son of Mahatma Dubey Resident of Mohalla - Civil Line, Sasaram, P.S. - Sasaram, District - Rohtas.

2.

Manish Kumar Son of Surendra Singh Resident of Village - Pyarepur, P.S. - Akorhi Gola, District - Rohtas.

3.

Ravi Ranjan Shukla Son of Sri Prasidh Narayan Shukla Resident of Village - Mitanda, P.S. - Sheosagar, District - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Law Secretary, Department of Law, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

Joint Secretary, Department of Law, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna. 5.

District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Prasad Singh, Adv.

Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC-9 Mr. Yogesh Kumar, AC to SC-9 Ms. Deepika Sharma, AC to SC-9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 21-03-2023 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief:- "1.

That the present writ application has been filed for issuance of an appropriate writ or writs setting aside Memo No. 5720, dated 05.09.2015 and Memo No. 5874, dated 08.09.2015 issued under the signature of Joint Secretary, Department of Law, Government of Bihar, Patna by which 19 Additional Public Prosecutors have been appointed in Rohtas district pursuant to the panel prepared in

Patna High Court CWJC No.16722 of 2015(2) dt.21-03-2023 2/2 year 2012 and further direction to the respondents to prepare the fresh panel and appoint the eligible and suitable persons as the Additional Public Prosecutor in the district of Rohtas and/or to grant any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioners are legally entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case."

It appears that with the efflux of time, the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous, nonetheless, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioners to avail such other alternative remedies as are otherwise available under the law for redressal of their subsisting grievances.. Liberty, so sought, is granted. The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U