Karuna Kumari v. The State Election Commission Panchayat And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1653 of 2017 ====================================================== Karuna Kumari, Wife of Sri Amit Kumar and daughter of Sri Ram Dahin Prasad, Resident of Village- Sriram Bigha, P.O. P.S. and Block- Gurua, District- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner-Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State Election Commission (Panchayat), Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna through the State the Election Commissioner.

2. The State Election Commissioner, State Election Commission (Panchayat), Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

3. The Secretary, State Election Commission (Panchayat), Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

4. The Joint Election Commissioner, State Election Commission (Panchayat), Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

5. The District Magistrate-cum-District Election Officer (Panchayat), Gaya, District- Gaya.

6. The Circle Officer, Gurua, District- Gaya.

7. The Circle Officer, Wazirganj, District- Gaya.

8. Sri Umesh Prasad, son of Late Ram Chandra Prasad, Resident of Village, P.O. and P.S. Banke Bazar, District- Gaya.

9. Smt. Laxmi Devi, Wife of Sri Mahendra Kumar, Daughter of Late Manki Sao, Resident of Village- Bumer, P.O. Jaigir Barachatti, P.S. and Block Barachatti, District- Gaya.

... ... Respondents- Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar -Manglam, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Amit Shrivastava, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 07-12-2017 For the present, in view of the fact that elections have already been held, learned counsel for the appellant does not press this appeal. However, makes a submission that ultimately, in case, the writ petition filed by her, being CWJC No.14976 of 2017, is allowed and the caste certificate of the appellant is restored, the appellant would be entitled to consequential

Patna High Court LPA No.1653 of 2017(2) dt.07-12-2017 2/2 benefits as per law. There is no reason as to why depending upon the result of the said writ petition, being CWJC No.14976 of 2017, consequential benefit, as per law, will not be restored to the appellant. That right in law would always be available to the appellant.

With the aforesaid observation, for the present, in view of the subsequent developments that have taken place, we permit the appellant to withdraw the appeal.

Disposed of as withdrawn.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Sunil/- U