Sajjan Dhari Prasad Sinha And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1567 of 2015 ===========================================================
1. Sajjan Dhari Prasad Sinha S/O Late Dev Narayan Singh R/O Village- Jamalpur, P.O. - Akhtiarpur, P.S.- Bikram, District- Patna (Bihar).
2. Raj Nath Ojha S/O Late Sita Ram Ojha R/O Village- IsmailpurKoil, P.O.- Koil Bhupat, P.S. - Mehandia, District- Arwal ( Bihar).
3. Ram Chandra Prasad S/O Late Dashrath Singh, R/O Village- Shahpur, P.O.- Danara, P.S Bikram, District- Patna (Bihar).
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna.
2. Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar.
3. Vice Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya.
4. Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya.
5. Finance Officer, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya.
6. Principal, Mahanth Madhusudan Mahavidyalaya, Bikram, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.
For the University :
Dr. Kumar Amitesh Chandra, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Inderdeo Prasad, S.C. 27 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 16-02-2018 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the State and Magadh University have been heard.
2. On 12.02.2018 also, nobody had appeared on behalf of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the Magadh University submitted that all the admissible retiral dues have been paid except for an amount of about Rs. 68,000/- each, which has been withheld, due to excess amount drawn by the petitioners. However, he further submitted that they have moved before the Grievance Redressal Cell of the Magadh University and the matter was taken up a week back
Patna High Court CWJC No.1567 of 2015 dt.16-02-2018 2/2 and appropriate order shall be passed on the same. It was submitted that the amount unless reconciled, the petitioners being Storekeepers at the relevant time, are accountable for the materials in their possession which were required to be handed over to the incumbent who took charge from them.
3. In view of the aforesaid position and taking into account the fact that this is the second consecutive occasion, when nobody has appeared on behalf of the petitioners to press the writ application, the Court can only presume that they have lost interest in pursuing the matter in view of the admitted retiral dues having been paid to them.
4. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed off.
5. The chart produced by learned counsel for the Magadh University relating to deduction/adjustment be kept on record.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U