Prafulla Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2799 of 2021 ====================================================== Prafulla Kumar Jha, son of Late Indradev Jha, resident of Village-Mehath, P.S.-Bhairabasthan, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Agriculture Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Director, Agriculture Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3.

The District Magistrate Darbhanga 4.

The District Agriculture Officer, Darbhanga 5.

The Agriculture Inspector, Darbhanga 6.

The Sub-Divisional Agriculture Officer, Benipur, Darbhanga 7.

The Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Patna, Bihar 8.

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Patna, Bihar 9.

Mantun Kamat, son of Late Yogendra Kamat, R/O Village-Deokuli, DistrictDarbhanga ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr. Shivam, Advocate For the S t a t e :

Mr.Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-13 Smt. Sunita Kumari, AC to AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 03-11-2022 While working as Sub-Divisional Agriculture Officer at Benipur, the petitioner was served with a charge memo arising out of his implication in Vigilance Case No.05/2018. The writ application was filed questioning the initiation of proceedings. During pendency, however, there have been many events which now have changed the entire factual scenario.

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel appearing

Patna High Court CWJC No.2799 of 2021(5) dt.03-11-2022 2/2 for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court towards paragraph 19 of the supplementary counter affidavit, which reads as follows:

"19. That from above mentioned facts it is evident that the proceeding is at its fag-end and the necessary final decision shall be taken expeditiously. Therefore, it is respectfully stated that no interference at this stage is required."

In view of the specific stand of the respondents that the proceedings is now at the fag-end and that final decision is to be taken expeditiously, this Court would only observe that final decision should be taken within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Submission on behalf of the petitioner that disposal may be with liberty to the petitioner to question the outcome, if required, is accepted.

Writ application is disposed of with liberty. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) PNM U