Gauri Shankar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.17046 of 2014 (2) dt.30-01-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17046 of 2014 ====================================================== Gauri Shankar Singh, Son of Late Sitaram Singh, Resident of VillageLewara, P.O- Nawadih, P.S-Tilantha, District-Rohtas at Sasaram .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Minor Irrigation Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Joint Secretary, Minor Irrigation Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation Department, Govt. of Bihar , Patna 4.The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Department, Bhabhua Division, Kaimur

5. The Accountant General, Bihar , Patna

6. The Treasury Officer, Kaimur, District-Kaimur .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : None. For the Respondent No. 1 to 4 & 6 : Mrs. Babita Kumari, AC to SC-18 For the Respondent No.5 : Mr. Mani Kant Mishra. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-01-2016 Despite repeated calls, none appears on behalf of the petitioner in support of the present writ petition, though the name of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is printed in the daily cause list.

However, the learned AC to SC-18 appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1 to 4 and 6 as also the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 5, by referring to the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.4, particularly paragraph-4 of that counter affidavit, submits that the present matter has become infructuous since all the valid grievances of the writ petitioner have been fully redressed.

Indisputably, copy of aforesaid counter affidavit has been served upon the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.17046 of 2014 (2) dt.30-01-2016 petitioner, but no rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner controverting the averments made in the aforesaid counter affidavit.

In the above view of the, particularly in view of the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4, the present petition is disposed of as infructuous since all the valid grievances of the petitioner have been redressed. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) brajesh/-BTiwary U