Arjun Singh, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8220 of 2025 ====================================================== 1.

Arjun Singh, son of Harihar Singh, resident of village Dhanadih, Police Station Daraunda, District Siwan.

2.

Ramakant Singh, son of Late Rambarai Singh, resident of village Dhanadah, Police Station Daraunda, District Siwan.

3.

Jitendra Kumar Yadav, son of Jainarayan Yadav, resident of village Ramapali, Post Office Chakra, Police Station Siwan Muffasil, District Siwan-841226.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Director General of Police -cum-Commandant General, Home Guard, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Magistrate, Siwan.

4.

The Superintendent of Police, Siwan.

5.

The District Commandant, Home Guard, Siwan.

6.

The Officer-in-charge, District Branch, Collectoriate, Siwan. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravindra Nath Dubey, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to AAG- 4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 04-08-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioners are aggrieved with the order, as contained in Memo No. 402 dated 20.03.2025, issued under the signature of respondent no.3 by which the nomination of the petitioners as Home Guard has been canceled. The petitioners have also sought quashing of the consequential order whereby the aforenoted order has been communicated to them.

3. Besides the various submissions made by the

Patna High Court CWJC No.8220 of 2025 dt.04-08-2025 2/2 learned Advocate for the petitioners in order to challenge the order impugned, it has been fairly contended that against the order, aforenoted, the petitioners have also preferred appeal before the respondent no.2 on 24.03.2025, but till date it has not been brought to its logical conclusion.

4. Learned Advocate for the State submitted that since the petitioners have already availed the remedy of appeal, the petitioners ought to pursue the same.

5. Having considered the submissions set forth by the learned Advocate for the respective parties, the present writ petition stands disposed off with a direction to respondent no.2 to consider the appeal of the petitioners and bring to its logical conclusion preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. (Harish Kumar, J) uday/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 05.08.2025 Transmission Date NA