Munna Kumar @ Rajeev Ranjan Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.367 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Munna Kumar @ Rajeev Ranjan Singh Son of Sri Birendra Kumar Singh Resident of Village- Kasmar,Po Kharika P.s sonepur, District Saran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, Rural Development Department, (MGNREGA) Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate , Saran Chapra.

4. The Dy. Development Commissioner, Saran , Chapra.

5. The Superintent of Police , Saran Chapra.

6. The Sub-Divsional Officer, Sonepur, Saran.

7. The Block Development Officer, Sonepur, Saran.

8. The Thanadhyaksh, Sonepur, Saran.

9. The Posteal Superintendent, Indian Postel Department, Saran Division, Saran Chapra, Govt. of India.

10. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Kasmar, Po Kharika, P.S Sonepur, District Saran.

11. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Kasmar, Po Kharika, P.s Sonepur, District Saran.

12. The Panchayat Officer, Panchayat Raj, Kasmar, Po Kharika, P.S Sonepur, District Saran.

13. The Panchayat Secretary, , Panchayat Raj, Kasmar, Po Kharika, P.S Sonepur, District Saran.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhav Prasad Yadaw, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-6 For Respondent Nos.9 and 10:Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ) 09-02-2016 Heard Mr. Madhav Prasad Yadav, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned Additional Advocate General No.6, appearing on behalf of the State-

Patna High Court CWJC No.367 of 2016 (2) dt.09-02-2016 2/2 respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application with liberty to approach this Court with appropriate application in future.

No objection has been raised to the prayer for withdrawal made by the petitioner.

In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the application is hereby disposed of as withdrawn with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach this Court with appropriate application, in future, if so advised, and/or to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible.

(I.A. Ansari, ACJ.) (Hemant Gupta, J.) Mkr./- U