Patna High CourtL.P.A/1746/2015disposed

The State Of Bihar And ORS v. Pranwesh Singh

2017-01-25Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1746 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18540 of 2014 With Interlocutory Application No. 7851 of 2015 And Interlocutory Application No. 7852 of 2015 ======================================================

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

2. The Principal Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. That Additional Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Joint Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

.... .... Appellant/s

Versus

Pranwesh Singh Son of Sri Bipin Bihari Singh, resident of villageJwawanpur-Gopalpur, P.S.- Biddupur, District- Vaishali, Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, District- Begusarai Presently posted (under suspension) posted in the office of Regional Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Bhagalpur Zone, Bhagalpur .

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

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sushil Kr. Singh, AC to AAG-10 For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) 25-01-2017 For the reasons indicated in I.A. No. 7851 of 2015, the delay of 175 days in filing the present L.P.A. is condoned. Accordingly, the said I.A. is allowed.

A supplementary affidavit on behalf of the appellants has been filed wherein a resolution or order dated 6.6.2016 has been annexed as Annexure-2. From perusal of the said order, it is

Patna High Court LPA No.1746 of 2015 (3) dt.25-01-2017 2/2 evident that the private respondent i.e. the petitioner in the writ application, has now been dismissed from service for possessing disproportionate assets beyond his means, on conclusion of the departmental proceeding.

In view of the said order, no adjudication is required in the present appeal with regard to the order dated 24.10.2014 in the changed circumstances.

The appeal stands dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) BTiwary/- U