Archana Thakur @ Archana Tiwary v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.717 of 2017 ====================================================== Archana Thakur @ Archana Tiwary Daughter of Abhay Thakur, Wife of Bishal Tiwary, Resident of Flat No. 52, Block No. 4, Goal Market Rajendra Nagar, Patna 16, P.S. Kadam Kuan, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Transport, Patna.

2.

The State Transport Authority, Bihar, Patna through its Secretary 3.

The Chairman, State Transport Authority, Bihar, Patna Old Secretariat, Patna - 1 4.

The Principal Secretary, Department of State Transport Authority, Bisheshwariya Bhawan, Bailey Road 5.

The Secretary Cum State Transport Commissioner Visheshwariya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna - 1 6.

Additional Secretary, State Transport Authority, Bisheshwariya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 1 7.

Sri Amrendra Kumar, Son of Sri R.D. Rai, C/o Shri Brahamdeo Ram, Resident of Diggi Khurd, Hazipur, District - Vaishali ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sahvind Kumar Sharma, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Chitranjan Sinha- PAAG2 Mr. Rohitabh Das, AC to AAG13 For the Res. No. 7 :

Mr. Sumeet Kr. Singh, Adv.

Ms. Deepali Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL ORDER 02-09-2025

1. Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Learned counsel for the respondent No. 7.

2. The Writ petition is filed for quashing the order dated 25.04.2016 (Annexure-1) and for a direction upon respondent No. 4, i.e., the Principal

Patna High Court CWJC No.717 of 2017(17) dt.02-09-2025 2/2 Secretary, Department of Transport, Bihar, Patna, to withdraw respondent No. 7, Sri Amrendra Kumar, the private member of the State Transport Authority, Bihar, on the ground that he has financial interest in the transport business, particularly that of his brothers and relatives.

3. During the course of arguments, the Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the matter has become infructuous as the tenure of respondent No. 7 was for a period of five years, which has been completed.

4. Considering the fact that the tenure of respondent No. 7 has already come to an end, nothing remains for adjudication in the present Writ petition. Therefore, the Writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.

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