Prashant Kumar Prashant v. The Bihar State Religious Trust Board

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9413 of 2020 ====================================================== Prashant Kumar Prashant Son of Chandra Bhushan Prasad Singh Resident of Village- Gilanichak, Post Office- Telmar, Block- Nagarnausa, Police StationChandi, District- Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Bihar State Religious Trust Board through its Superintendent-cumSpecial Officer, having its office at Vidyapati Marg, Patna. 2.

The Chairman, the Bihar State Board of Religious Trust, Patna. 3.

The Superintendent -cum- Special Officer, the Bihar State Board of Religious Trust, Patna.

4.

The Sub- Divisional Officer, Hilsa, District- Nalanda. 5.

The Circle Officer, Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda. 6.

Guddu Singh Son of Late Tarni Prasad Singh Resident of VillageGilanichak, Police Station- Chandi, Block- Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda. 7.

Hari Shankar Prasad Singh Son of Late Tarni Prasad Singh Resident of Village- Gilanichak, Police Station- Chandi, Block- Nagarnausa, DistrictNalanda. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Raj Kishore Roy, GP-18 Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate For Respondent No. 6 and 7 :

Mr. P.K. Shahi, Sr. Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH) 28-01-2022 This application has been taken up for online hearing through video conference because of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, after some argument, seeks permission to withdraw this application with a

Patna High Court CWJC No.9413 of 2020(7) dt.28-01-2022 2/2 liberty to avail remedy under the provisions of Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, against the decision of the Board under Section 28(2)(h) of the Act.

This application is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to the petitioner to approach appropriate forum, if any. The petitioner shall also be at liberty to seek condonation of delay if any question of limitation arises. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) ( Madhuresh Prasad, J) K.K.RAO/- U