Patna High CourtMJC/2827/2016dismissed

Kalindi Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-05-11Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh,The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2827 of 2016 In C. REV. 245 of 2009 ====================================================== Kalindi Devi, Wife of Late Ravi Shankar Pandey, resident of village - Moriama, Police Station Bikram, District Patna .... .... Petitioner / Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Secretary, Law Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Chairman Bihar State Electricity Board, Bailey Road, Patna

4. The Member Secretary, Bihar State Legal Services Authorities, Patna .... .... Respondents / Opposite parties.

====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Shekhar, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma and Mr. Akhileshwar Singh, Advocates.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 11-05-2017 An application for review was dismissed by a bench of this Court on 06.01.2010. After dismissal, the petitioner slept over the matter for a period of six years and filed this application for restoration on 05.08.2016 and the only explanation given is that the petitioner was not aware of dismissal of the matter. The petitioner having slept over the matter and having not enquired as to what happened with the review application cannot make an excuse that he was unaware of dismissal of the review application. The petitioner before having

Patna High Court MJC No.2827 of 2016 (3) dt.11-05-2017 2/2 invoked the review jurisdiction should have enquired into the matter and filed the application for restoration within a reasonable period. Six years delay in filing the restoration application and seeking restoration of his civil review application, in our considered view, is not called for in the facts and circumstances of the case.

The restoration application is, therefore, dismissed. (Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) Dilip, AR U