Most. Dev Kumari Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7712 of 2017 ====================================================== Most. Dev Kumari Devi Wife of Late Ram Shrestha Singh Resident of Village Bhusra, P.O. Hasua, P.S. - Gayghat, District - Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Panchayti Raj Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

3.

The President, Zila Parishad, Muzaffarpur.

4.

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Cum Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Muzaffarpur.

5.

The Additional Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Muzaffarpur. 6.

The District Engineer, Zila Parishad, Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the State :

Mr. Satya Vrat (AC to GP-10) For Zila Parishad :

Mr. Suneil Kumar Thakkur, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 18-07-2025 Upon repeated calls, no one appears on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for Zila Parishad are present.

2. Learned counsel for the State submits that vide order no.2 dated 10.04.2018, four weeks' time was granted to the petitioner for filing the rejoinder affidavit, but the same has not been filed till date as per the Office notes dated 10.07.2025. Today, upon repeated calls, no one appears on behalf of the petitioner.

3. From the pleadings, it transpires that the present writ petition has been filed for commanding the respondent

Patna High Court CWJC No.7712 of 2017(3) dt.18-07-2025 2/2 authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment on the post of Grade-IV. Further prayer has also been made directing the respondent authorities to dispose off the representation of the petitioner within time framed.

4. Learned counsel appearing for Zila Parishad submits that from the affidavit, it become crystal clear that the age of petitioner at the time of filing the present writ petition was 63 years and her husband died in the year 1977. The present writ petition has been filed in the year 2017 and today, the age of petitioner is about 71 years.

5. In the light of the factual matrix of the case, this Court is of the firm view that the case has become infructuous. Hence, this writ petition is hereby dismissed as having become infructuous.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U