Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No 1600 of 2012 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 13640 of 2011 ====================================================== Manoj Kumar S/O Shri Radhey Ram Resident Of Village- Suryapura, P.OKishunpura, Police Station- Basantpur, District- Siwan. .... .... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Patna.
3. The Director (Primary Education), Bihar, Patna.
4. Teh District Education Officer, Siwan.
5. The Block Education Extension Officer, Basantpur, District- Siwan.
6. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Suryapura, Police Station- Basantpur, District- Siwan.
7. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Suryapura, Police StationBasantpur, District- Siwan.
8. The Member, District Teacher Appointment Appellate Authority, Siwan.
9. Madan Ram S/O Shri Sajjan Ram Resident Of Village- Lakhnaur Kishunpura, Police Station- Basantpur, District- Siwan. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanjay Kr No.1 Sc12 ====================================================== CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH And HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH) 02-12-2015 Respondent No 9, in the writ proceedings, is the appellant in this intra-Court appeal assailing the judgment and order dated 13.03.2012 of the learned Single Judge passed in CWJC No 13640 of 2011 setting aside the order of the Teachers' Appointment Appellate Authority, Siwan which had rejected the writ petitioner's application on grounds of limitation. The learned
Patna High Court LPA No.1600 of 2012 (3) dt.02-12-2015 Single Judge allowed the writ petition and remanded the matter to the Authority. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Authority has found no merit in the application of the writ petitioner and, as such, dismissed the appeal. Accordingly, learned counsel for the appellant states that he has no cause to pursue now and the appeal be disposed of as infructuous. He, thus, seeks leave to withdraw this appeal. Leave is granted and the appeal is disposed of as infructuous. (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) U M.E.H./-