Raj Ballabh Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17546 of 2014 =========================================================== Raj Ballabh Prasad Singh son of late Gudar Prasad Singh, resident of villagePiparia Karari, P.O.- Diara Piparia, P.S.- Piparia (Barahia) District- Lakhisarai. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Chief Engineer, Rural Development Special Range, Patna, Harding Road, Barrack No. 2, Patna.
4. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Balmiki Nagar
5. The Superintending Engineer, Rural Development Special Circle, Saharsa.
6. The Superintending Engineer, Water Drainage Circle Motihari.
7. The Executive Engineer, Rural Development, Special Division, Saharsa.
8. The Executive Engineer Rural Work Department Work Division, Simri Bakhtiyarpur.
9. The Executive Engineer, Water Drainage Division, Koshi Project, Saharsa.
10. The Executive Engineer Water Drainage Division, Motihari.
11. The Accountant General Bihar, Birchand Patel Path, Patna.
12. The Treasury Officer, Lakhisarai.
.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : None.
For the State : Mr. Ramadhar Singh, GP-25 For the Accountant General : Mr. Raj Nandan Prasad, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 02-11-2017 Referring to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 4, 6 and 10, learned counsel for the State has
Patna High Court CWJC No.17546 of 2014 dt.02-11-2017 2/2 submitted that no dues certificate regarding payment of the petitioner has been sent to the Treasury Officer, Lakhisarai vide letter No. 694 dated 28.06.2016 and all the retiral dues of the petitioner have already been paid.
2.
Despite repeated calls, nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner.
3.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the State and the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 4, 6 and 10, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Kanchan/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 03.11.2017 Transmission Date NA