← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/1866/2023rejected

Nayadu Devi, Secretary, Gramin Mahila Morcha v. The State Of Bihar

2024-10-23Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy,The Chief Justice-2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1866 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9174 of 2023 ====================================================== Nayadu Devi, Secretary, Gramin Mahila Morcha W/o Arvind Kumar Singh Resident of Village- Karneji, P.S. Vaishali, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar.

2.

Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Director, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur.

5.

Superintendent of Police, Vaishali at Hajipur. 6.

Civil Surgeon-Cum-Member Secretary, District Health Samittee, Vaishali at Hajipur.

7.

Circle Officer, Paterhi Belsar, District- Vaishali. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Raghwanand, GA-11 Mr.Pratik Kumar, AC to GA-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 23-10-2024 Read order dated 22.10.2024:

We notice that the writ petition was dismissed on merits and an MJC would not be maintainable, however, since none appears for the petitioner today also, post this case tomorrow i.e., 23.10.2024.

2. The order challenged in the MJC dated 04.07.2023 adjourned the matter to another day, after noticing the absence

Patna High Court MJC No.1866 of 2023(4) dt.23-10-2024 2/2 of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The writ petition itself was taken up on 05.07.2023 and again in the absence of the learned Counsel for the petitioner was dismissed on merits after perusing the records and hearing the learned Government Advocate.

3. Today also, none appears for the petitioner, and as we noticed herein above, the writ petition was dismissed on merits and the MJC is not maintainable.

4. The MJC stands rejected.

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) (Partha Sarthy, J) Anushka/- U