Vidyankar Pathak v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9698 of 2012 ====================================================== VIDYANKAR PATHAK S/O Late Prabhakar Pathak Resident Of Mohalla Gauri Shankar Colony Gaighat, P.O. Gulzarbagh, P.S. Alamganj, DistrictPatna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.
Bihar Institute Of Public Administration @ Rural Development, WALMI Complex, Phulwarisharif, Patna through its Director General 3.
The Chief Secretary Cum President/Chairman Bihar Institute Of Public Administration and Rural Development, WALMI Complex, Phulwarisharif, Patna 4.
The Director General, Bihar Institute Of Public Administration and Rural Development, WALMI Complex, Phulwarisharif, Patna 5.
The Principal Secretary, Personnel And Administrative Reforms (General Administration) Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna 6.
The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh Mr. Shyama Kant Singh, Advocates For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, AC to AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
It appears vide order dated 10.07.2012 that this Court has directed to issue notice to respondent nos. 2 to 4 by both under ordinary process as well as under registered cover and the petitioner is also directed to file requisites within a period of one week, failing which this application as against the
Patna High Court CWJC No.9698 of 2012(4) dt.11-12-2023 2/2 concerned respondents shall stand rejected without further reference to a Bench. Thereafter, the matter was taken up on 30.04.2014 and the Court had recorded that the petitioner may take appropriate remedial steps but till today no steps has been taken by the petitioner and in the writ petition, the main grievance is against the respondent nos. 2 to 4. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition stands dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U