← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/8935/2024consigned

Rameshwar Ray v. The State Board Of Religious Trust

2024-09-20Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8935 of 2024 ====================================================== Rameshwar Ray Son of Late Prasad Ray, Trust Committee Chairman of Manokamana Mai Mandir, resident of village- Godhiya, Police StationSikarganj, District- East Champaran at Motihari. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Board of Religious Trust through its Chairman, Vidhyapati Marg, Police Station- Buddha Colony, Patna- 1.

2.

The District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari. 3.

Ashok Kumar Yadav, Son of Laye Dukhit Rai, Resident of Village- Godhiya, P.S.- Sikarganj, District- East Champaran at Motihari. 4.

Braj Kishore Kumar, Son of Bhaiya Ram Rai, Resident of Village- Godhiya, P.S.- Sikarganj, District- East Champaran at Motihari. 5.

Bhagwan Prasad, Son of Late Shambhu Prasad, Resident of VillageGodhiya, P.S.- Sikarganj, District- East Champaran at Motihari. 6.

Lalan Prasad Yadav, Son of Late Amiri Rai, Resident of Village- Godhiya, P.S.- Sikarganj, District- East Champaran at Motihari. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mahasweta Chatterjee For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Standing Counsel (19) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 20-09-2024 In this case, notice was issued to the respondent nos.3 to 6 on 22.07.2024 and the process was to be completed within a period of two weeks.

2. As it was not completed, the petition was rejected on 05.08.2024.

3. However, despite the said rejection, after the petitioner filed requisites on 17.08.2024, the office in a casual manner issued notice to the respondent nos.3 to 6.

4. The office later realised the mistake and has given the following explanation:-

Patna High Court CWJC No.8935 of 2024(3) dt.20-09-2024 2/2 This writ application stood rejected on 05.08.2024 in view of Hon'ble Court's order dated 22.07.2024 as requisites of notices have been filed on 17.08.2024 i.e. after expiry of peremptory time. However, noticed filed after expiry of peremptory time have been issued to the respondent nos.3 to 6 out of inadvertence which is deeply & sincerely regretted.

Further respondent nos.3 to 6 has appeared through Vakalatnama and in the meanwhile, the learned counsel for the petitioner has filed and I.A. No. 01/2024 for condonation of delay in filing of requisites, which is kept on record.

5. The facts have been recorded, the order dated 22.07.2024 was not complied in time and as such, it stood rejected on 05.08.2024.

6. Perused the file and accordingly, the present petition stands consigned.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U