Mundrika Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1264 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13183 of 2015 ====================================================== Mundrika Prasad, son of Late Keshav Prasad, Resident of village- Shahpur (Tikri Road), P.S.- Town, District- Aurangabad, Bihar, .... .... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Co-operative Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Co-operative Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Managing Director, Bihar State Warehousing Corporation, Patna.
4. The Deputy General Manager (Commercial), Bihar State Warehoussing Corporation, Patna.
5. The Divisional Manager (B) H.O. Bihar State Warehousing Corporation, Patna.
6. Sri Govind Prasad, Son of - Late Baijnath Prasad, Resident of Madlotganj (Near Railway Cinema) P.S.- Kotwali District- Gaya, Bihar. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance:
For the Appellant : Mr. Siya Ram Sahi, Advocate Mr. Purushotam Sharma, Advocate For the BSWC : Mr. Mukundjee, Advocate For the State : Mr. Indradeo Prasad, SC 27 For the Resp. No. 6 : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 25-11-2016 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has argued before the learned Single Bench that the Technical Bid of the appellant was wrongly rejected, but a perusal of the order does not show that any such argument was raised
Patna High Court LPA No.1264 of 2016 (6) dt.25-11-2016 before the learned Single Bench.
3. In view of the said fact, learned counsel for the appellant wishes to withdraw the present Letters Patent Appeal with liberty to seek remedy of review. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid. However, the grant of liberty shall not be construed as any expression on the merits of the issues raised. As and when the appellant files a review application which shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. (Hemant Gupta, ACJ) (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/Ibrar U