← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/14890/2015dfd for non appearance

Prakash Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2024-01-02Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14890 of 2015 ====================================================== 1.

Prakash Kumar and Ors Son of Govind Yadav Resident of Mohalla - Lalluchak Angari, P.S. Lodipur, District - Bhagalpur 2.

Vikesh Kumar Son of Sagun Pandit Resident of Mohalla - Ishakchak, Lichi Bagan, P.S. Ishakchak, District - Bhagalpur 3.

Lalan Kumar Rajak Son of Mahesh Rajak Resident of Village - Arya Tola, Sabour, P.S. Sabour, District - Bhagalpur 4.

Md. Shaif Akhtar Son of Late Md. Salim Akhtar Resident of village - Chouka Fatehpur, P.S. Zeromile, District - Bhagalpur 5.

Shudhansu Shekhar Thakur Son of Late Amrendra Thakur Resident of village - Rani Talab Fatehpur, P.S. Zeromile, District - Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur 3.

The District Education officer, Bhagalpur 4.

The Block Development officer, Sabour, Bhagalpur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr. S.D. Yadav, AAG-9 Mr. Braj Bhushan Mishra AC to AAG-9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 02-01-2024 No one appears on behalf of the petitioners.

2. On 05.12.2018 on call no one had appeared on behalf of the petitioners either. The order dated 05.12.2018 read as follows:- "No one appears on behalf of the petitioners.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the writ application has become

Patna High Court CWJC No.14890 of 2015(3) dt.02-01-2024 2/2 infructuous.

Since counsel for the petitioners is not present, the case is adjourned for 10.12.2018. On that date, if no one appears on behalf of the petitioners, the Court will proceed on the basis of statement made by respondents at the bar and dispose of the writ application."

3. Even after lapse of five years on call no one has appeared.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed for non prosecution.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U