The State Of Bihar v. Ram Prasidh Ray
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.657 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12531 of 2014 ====================================================== 1.
The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Department of Education, New Secretariat, Vikas Bhawan, Patna 2.
The Principal Secretary Department of Education, New Secretariat, Vikas Bhawan, Patna 3.
The Director (Secondary Education) Department of Education, Secondary Education Office, Budh Marg, Patna ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
Ram Prasidh Ray S/o Sri Ram Ratan Ray Assistant Teacher, Project Girls High School, Mahua, p.s.- Mahua, Dsitt.- Vaishali ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr.Shailendra Kumar (Ac To Paag 2) For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Ajay Kumar Sharma, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) 07-05-2024 The present LPA was presented in the year 2019. Office has raised objection for non-compliance of sufficiency of court fee stamp as per provision of law, limitation petition to be filed and one complete set of paper book of connected writ petition of Hon'ble Single Judge as per c.s. 139 Rule 4 (i)(ii)(iii) were required to be complied. In this regard, on 14.11.2022, four weeks' time was granted, it is necessary to re-produce order dated 14.11.2022 and it reads as under:- " As prayed for by Mr.Tej Pratap Singh, learned AC to AAG 13 for the State, four weeks time is granted to remove the defects, failing which the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.657 of 2019(9) dt.07-05-2024 2/2 appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench.
2. Let the name of Mr. Tej Pratap Singh, learned AC to AAG 13 be printed in cause list in the column of the appellant."
2. Before expiry of four weeks time I.A. No. 1 of 2022 was filed on 12.12.2022 seeking extension of time of four weeks. In this backdrop, the State or its counsel have not taken any initiative to get the matter listed for the purpose of compliance of office objection(s) nor as on this day they have complied office objection(s). As on today, whatever the time has been granted and extension sought by the appellant-State have already lapsed in the month of March, 2023. Therefore, the State is not interested in pursuing the matter as is evident from their lethargic attitude in pursuing the matter.
3. Accordingly, the present LPA No. 657 of 2019 stands dismissed in the light of order dated 14.11.2022. Pending I.A.(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J) ( Alok Kumar Pandey, J) abhishekkr/- U