Patna High CourtCWJC/6023/2011dismissed

The Divisional Forest Officer v. The Commissioner,Magadh Div.And

2015-09-28Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6023 of 2011 ======================================================

1. The Divisional Forest officer, Nawada Distt. Nawada.

2. The Range Officer of Forest, Nawada.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.

2. The Distt Magistrate-cum-Collector-cum-the Chairman, Rural Development Agency, Nawada, Distt Nawada.

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Magistrate, Nawada, Distt. Nawada. .... .... Respondents 1st Set.

4. Mrs. Rajendra Prasad, son of late Birju Majhi

5. Mr. Ramanju Singh, son of Shri Sidhi Singh, Respondent no. 4 & 5 are resident of village Bhimbigha Tola Rahul Nagar, Narhat, P. S Narhat, Distt. Nawada.

6. The Principal Secretary, Labour Department, Patna Bihar. .... .... Respondents 2nd Set.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar (AC-GA-8) For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vivek Prasad, GP - 18 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

13. 28-09-2015 Heard learned A.C. to Govt. Advocate - 8 and Sri Vivek Prasad, learned Govt. Pleader - 18.

In the present writ petition, the petitioner no. 1/Divisional Forest Officer, Nawada has questioned the order of Sub-Divisional Officer, Nawada in Minimum Wages Case No. 13 of 2004. The order impugned was questioned only on the ground that the Sub-Divisional Officer was not at all competent to pass any order under the Minimum Wages Act. However, in view of facts disclosed in the counter affidavit alongwith Annexure - B to the counter affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioner accepts that

Patna High Court CWJC No.6023 of 2011 (13) dt.28-09-2015 2/2 the Sub-Divisional Officer was competent to adjudicate in the matter.

In view of the facts and circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioners does not want to press the petition. The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U