Patna High CourtC. REV./448/2017dismissed

Pankaj Kumar v. The Union Of India And ORS

2018-08-01Justice Smt. Anjana Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.448 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12075 of 2013 ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar, Son of Shri Bijay Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Teus, Police Station- Jairampur, District- Sheikhpura .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

2. The State of Bihar.

3. The Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Fatuha Industrial Area, Mouza-Raipura, P.S.-Fatuha, District-Patna.

4. The Circle Officer, Barbigha under Sheikhpura District.

5. Sri Raushan Kumar, Son of Sri Trishuldhari Singh, Resident of VillageBarapar, Barbigha, P.S.- Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ramesh Prasad Singh, Advocate For the S t a t e : Mr. Arun Kumar Bhagat, A.C. to AAG-12 For the BPCL : Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Advocate Mr. Om Prakash Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State as well as the learned counsel appearing for the BPCL.

The petitioner seeks review of the order dated 16.10.2017 passed in CWJC No.12075 of 2013.

The sole ground on which the petitioner has sought review of the order is that Shri Ramesh Prasad Singh, learned Advocate was ill and the other counsel did not appear and, therefore, the matter was disposed of on the basis of the

Patna High Court C. REV. No.448 of 2017 (7) dt.01-08-2018 2/2 submission of the respondents.

This ground is not enough for this Court to entertain the review application as no error apparent on the face of the record has been pointed out.

The review application thus stands dismissed. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may seek appropriate remedy in an appropriate proceeding. (Anjana Mishra, J) PNM U