Patna High CourtMJC/5437/2013dismissed

Shiv Nandan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-03-09Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5437 of 2013 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9695 of 2009 =========================================================== Shiv Nandan Yadav, son of Late Garbhu Prasad Yadav, resident of village - Belo, Police Station - Murliganj, District - Madhepura. .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Director, Panchayati Raj Directorate, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Madhepura.

4. The Block Development Officer, Madhepura.

.... .... Opposite Parties.

=========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Shashi Shekhar Prasad Sinha, AC to GA-13. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09-03-2015 ------------------ Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AC to GA-13 for the State.

2. The present application has been filed for modification of the order dated 17.08.2009 passed in C.W.J.C. No.9695 of 2009, which was disposed of with the following observations/directions: "In the above circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for expeditious disposal of the pending claims as raised in this writ application, the petitioner proposes to file a fresh representation before the District Magistrate, Madhepura (respondent no.3). In case such a representation is filed stating the details of the

Patna High Court MJC No.5437 of 2013 dt.09-03-2015 2/2 claims as also enclosing the copy of the relevant documents in support of his claims along with the certified copy of the present order within a period of four weeks, the respondent no.3 shall consider the grievances of the petitioner as raised in his representation and dispose it of in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months on receipt of such representation, so that the admitted retiral dues could be paid to the petitioner without further delay."

3. I find no reason to modify the order dated 17.08.2009 passed in C.W.J.C. No.9695 of 2009. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U