← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/16985/2016dismiss for nonprosecution

M/S Nesar Ahmad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2024-04-15Justice Smt. G. Anupama Chakravarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16985 of 2016 ====================================================== M/s Nesar Ahmad, Agarwa Mohalla, Motihari through its partner Nesar Ahmad Son of late Abdul Wahid resident of Mohalla - Agarwa, Gali No. 1, P.S.- Mohalla-Agarwa, Gali No. 1, District - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Deputy Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Principal Secretary, Building Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

5.

The Joint Secretary, Building Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

6.

The Executive Engineer, Building Construction Department, Building Division, Motihari.

7.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Building Sub Division No. 1, Motihari, East Champaran.

8.

The Accounts Officer, Building Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Manoj Kr.Ambastha, SC26 :

Mr. Subodh Kumar, AC to SC26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL ORDER 15-04-2024 No representation on behalf of the petitioner.

2. This Court, vide order dated 10.04.2024 made the following order:- "As per the contents of the order dated 11.01.2024, supplementary affidavit was filed by the respondents which clearly disclose that the amounts

Patna High Court CWJC No.16985 of 2016(5) dt.15-04-2024 2/2 have been paid to the petitioner.

2.

There is no representation for the petitioner.

3.

As a last indulgence, for hearing the petitioner, list this matter on 15.04.2024."

3. Inspite of posting the case as last indulgence for hearing the petitioner, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, therefore, this Court is of the considerable view that the petitioner has no interest to evince with the matter.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as default and for non-prosecution.

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) Shanu/- U