← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/14607/2015dfd for non appearance

Madan Prasad Singh v. The Union Of India And ORS

2023-08-28Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14607 of 2015 ====================================================== Madan Prasad Singh Son of Late Keshwar Prasad Singh, Resident of VillageRuppur, P.S. Bhabhua, District Kaimur Bhabua. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Govt. of India New Delhi.

2.

The Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Govt. of India New Delhi.

3.

The National Highway Authority of India through its Chairman-cumSecretary Ministry of Shipping Road Transport and Highway Govt. of India New Delhi.

4.

The Project Director, National Highway Authority, D.I.G. Colony Maqbul Alam Road, Varanasi, U.P.

5.

The State of Bihar through the D.M. Kaimur at Bhabhua. 6.

The District Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Competent Authority, Kaimur (Bhabhua).

7.

The Additional Collector-cum-Arbitrator, Bhabhua. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the State :

Mr. Rajiv Kumar Singh, Adv.

:

Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the NHAI :

Mr. S.N. Pathak, Adv.

:

Mr. Saurav Nikunj, Adv.

For the UOI :

Mr. Abhay Shankar Jha, C.G.C.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 28-08-2023 No one appears on behalf of petitioner even after repeated calls, however, learned counsel for the State, counsel for the National Highway Authority of India and counsel for the Union of India are present.

2. It transpires from the previous order dated 16.08.2023 that as a matter of last indulgence this case was

Patna High Court CWJC No.14607 of 2015(3) dt.28-08-2023 2/2 adjourned with direction that if no one shall appear on behalf of petitioner then appropriate order shall be passed on the next date. Today also no one appears on behalf of petitioner.

3. In this background, it transpires to this Court that petitioner has no interest to pursue this case, therefore, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed for default due to nonprosecution. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Ritik/- U