Patna High CourtMJC/879/2016dismissed

Awadesh Kumar Thakur v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-09-05Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 879 of 2016 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13679 of 2011 =========================================================== Awadesh Kumar Thakur Son of Late Ajab Lal Thakur, Resident of Prakriti Apartment, Professor's Colony, P.S . - Shastrinagar, District - Patna, Bihar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Bihar State Electricity Board through its Chairman, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna now known as Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd., through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director namely Sri Pratyay Amrit.

3. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna now known as Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd.

4. The Chief Engineer, Store and Purchase, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna now known as Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd.

5. The General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, PESU, Patna.

6. The Director, Administration, Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Kaushik, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Namrata Mishra, Advocate (Opposite Parties No. 2 to 6) =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 05-09-2018 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner.

2. Heard learned counsel for the State and Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'Company').

3. The petitioner has alleged non compliance of the order dated 12.08.2015 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13679 of 2011, by which the Company was directed to dispose off the representation filed by the petitioner on 15.12.2010, by a reasoned order.

Patna High Court MJC No.879 of 2016 dt.05-09-2018 2/2

4. In the supplementary show cause filed on behalf of the Company, such order communicated on 08.02.2016, has been brought on record as Annexure-A, copy of which was served on learned counsel for the petitioner on 07.12.2017.

5. In view of no rejoinder to the same having been filed as also nobody appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the Court finds that the order in the writ petition has been complied with.

6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U