← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/2525/2017disposed

Govind Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-05-01Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2525 of 2017 ======================================================

1. Govind Kumar, Son of Shri Mungalal Sah, resident of village - Kanhua Godhiyari, P.S. Gamhriya, District - Madhepura

2. Raushan Kumar, Son of Shri Bam Bahadur Yadav, resident of village - Batreha, Ward No. 25, Town and P.S. and District - Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrate, Saharsa

3. The District Education Officer, Saharsa

4. The District Project Officer ( Establishment ), District Education Officer, Saharsa

5. The Block Education Extension Officer, Salkhua, District - Saharsa

6. The Mukhiya Cum Chairman, Employment Unit Gram Panchayat Raj, Alani, District - Saharsa

7. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Alani, District - Saharsa

8. The Presiding officer, District Appellate Authority, Saharsa ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Murari Narain Chaudhary, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Prabhakar Jha- Gp27 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 01-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

In view of the fact that the State Appellate Authority is now functional, the petitioners seek permission to withdraw the writ petition in order to file an appeal before the State Appellate Authority.

Permission is granted.

In case the petitioners file an appeal before the State Appellate Authority within a period of one month from today

Patna High Court CWJC No.2525 of 2017(6) dt.01-05-2018 2/2 along with a copy of this order, the State Appellate Authority is required to decide the appeal on its own merit after condoning the delay in filing the appeal in view of the fact that the petitioners were pursuing the writ petition for the same relief before this Court.

With the aforesaid liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) spandey/- U