Rajendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6339 of 2015 ====================================================== Rajendra Yadav Son of Late Bupttan Yadav resident of village - Salempur Saini, P.S. Kahalgaon, District - Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
3. District Magistrate, Bhagalpur
4. Deputy Development Commissioner, Bhagalpur
5. Sub - Divisional officer, Klahalgaon, District - Bhagalpur
6. Smt. Priti Sagar Pammi Wife of Sri Jai Karan Das At Present Working as Mukhia of Gram Panchayat, Salempur Sainie, P.S. Kahalgaon, District - Bhagalpur .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Pratap Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent State: Mr. Ashok Kumar Keshri, AAG-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 13-01-2016 Heard Mr. Pratap Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Ashok Kumar Keshri, learned Additional Advocate General No.11, appearing for the State respondents. After some arguments, Mr. Pratap Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw this application, made, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, with liberty to approach the appropriate authority with appropriate application, if so advised, and/or to take recourse to such provisions of law as may
Patna High Court CWJC No.6339 of 2015 (2) dt.13-01-2016 2/2 be permissible.
No objection has been raised by the respondents to the prayer for withdrawal made by the petitioner. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, this writ application is hereby disposed of as withdrawn with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority with appropriate application, if so advised, and/or to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible. However, we make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the present writ petition. (I.A. Ansari, ACJ) (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Pawan/- U