← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/537/2005dismissed

Hari Lal Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-11-08Mr. Justice Birendra Prasad Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.537 of 2005 ====================================================== Hari Lal Sharma son of Sri Suraj Sharma, resident of Village Gobindpur, Police Station Falka, District Katihar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms at Katihar within the district of Katihar

3. Bibi Nashima Khatoon wife of Md.Jaffo, resident of Village Seikhpura, Police Station Bhawanipur, District Purnia .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: Mr.Vikas Ratan Bharti, AC to GP 9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-11-2016 Despite repeated calls, none appears on behalf of the petitioner in support of the present writ petition. However, I have heard the learned AC to GP 9 appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 and 2.

The learned State counsel, after going through the record of this case, has rightly pointed out that the present writ petition stood rejected as against the contesting respondent no. 3 on account of non-compliance of the Court's peremptory order dated 20.02.2006, as a result of which, the present matter has become incompetent and cannot proceed further. The submission made by the learned State counsel stands corroborated by the office notes dated 16.09.2016 and 19.09.2016.

In view of the fact that the writ petition has stood rejected way back in the year 2006 against the contesting respondent no. 3 on account of non-compliance of the Court's peremptory order dated 20.02.2006, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping the present

Patna High Court CWJC No.537 of 2005 (3) dt.08-11-2016 2/2 matter pending as the writ petition has to fail in absence of the contesting respondent no. 3.

In above view of the matter, the present writ petition is dismissed since it has become incompetent. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Tahir/- U