← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/15899/2013disposed

Indrakala Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-03-28Mr. Justice Jyoti Saran2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15899 of 2013 ====================================================== Indrakala Devi, Wife Of Shiv Kumar Yadav, Resident of VillageBhaptiyahi, P.S.- Saraigarh, Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Supaul.

4. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Supaul.

5. The Block Development Officer -cum- Executive Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Block- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

6. The State Election Commission (Panchayati Raj), Bihar, Patna.

7. The Pramukh, Panchayat Samiti, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul, Namely Sri Vijay Kumar Yadav.

8. Ghoghan Ram, Son of name not known to the Petitioner, Member Panchayati Samiti, Laukaha, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

9. Mahadeo Mehta, Son of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Chhitahi Hanuman Nagar, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

10. Taiyab Husain, Son of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Chhitahi Hanuman Nagar, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

11. Yogendra Sharma, Son of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Shahpur Prithvipatti, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

12. Raghuvansh Yadav, Son of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Jhila-Dumri, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

13. Madhulata Devi, Wife of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Jhila-Dumri, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

14. Dhanawatti Devi, Wife of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Pipra-Khurd, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

15. Nikky Pandey, Wife of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Murli, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, DistrictSupaul.

16. Urmila Devi, Wife of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Dholi, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, DistrictSupaul.

17. Radha Devi, Wife of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Banainiyan, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

18. Shiv Prasad Yadav, Son of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Saraigarh, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

19. Ashok Kumar, Son of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Saraigarh, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

Patna High Court CWJC No.15899 of 2013 (2) dt.28-03-2016

20. Durgi Lal Mandal, Son of name not known to the petitioner, Member Panchayat Samiti, Chand-Pipar, Block + P.S.- Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

21. Suchita Devi, Wife of name not known to the petitioner Member Panchayat Samiti, Lalganj, Block + P.S. - Saraigarh Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.

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

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent-State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, AC to SC-30 For the Respondent-SEC : Mr. Girish Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 28-03-2016 None appears on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, learned Assisting Counsel to Standing Counsel No.30 for the State and Mr. Girish Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the State Election Commission are present. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fixation of the date of special meeting for consideration of the no confidence motion moved against the Pramukh.

The matter having remained pending for the last three years there is nothing on record to demonstrate as to the outcome of the said meeting.

In the circumstances, the issue raised has become academic and warrants no indulgence.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- U