Lakindra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11200 of 2017 ====================================================== Lakindra Yadav S/o Sri Dhanai Rai Resident of Village-Manpur, P.S. Bochahan Distt. Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Secretary, State Election Commission, Bihar Patna.

4. The Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

6. The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur.

7. The District Programme Officer, (Establishment), Muzaffarpur.

8. The District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur.

9. The Child Development Officer, Bochahan, Muzaffarpur.

10. The Block Development Officer, Bochahan, Muzaffarpur.

11. The Panchayati Raj Office, Bochahan, Muzaffarpur.

12. The Mukhia, Gram Panchayat Raj Kafen Chaudhary, Bochahan, Muzaffarpur.

13. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Kafen Chaudhary, Bochahan, Muzaffarpur.

14. The Head Master(Incharge) Rajkiya Utakarmit Middle School, Manpur, Bochahan, Muzaffarpur.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

For the State :

Mr. Ajay, G.A. 5 For Election Commission:

Mr. Amit Shrivastava, Advocate Mr. Girish Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 16-08-2018 Present writ petition is being adjourned time and again right from August, 2017 mostly due to non-availability of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. From the earlier proceedings it appears that except adjourning the matter no further order is passed as the learned counsel appearing on

Patna High Court CWJC No.11200 of 2017(12) dt.16-08-2018 2/2 behalf of the petitioner had remained absent. Today also when the petition was taken up, called out in the first session, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was absent. Thereafter, when the matter is taken up for further hearing in the second session, in the second session also the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has chosen to remain absent. Under the circumstances, it appears that the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has lost the interest in the matter. Under the circumstances, present petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution.

(Mukesh R. Shah, CJ) (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) P.K.P./-R.S.Sen U