← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/20890/2019dfd for non appearance

Binay Rout v. The State Of Bihar

2020-11-13Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20890 of 2019 ====================================================== Binay Rout S/o Late Jamuna Raut Ex-Principal Govt. + 2 Higher Secondary School, Dhanarua, District- Patna, Residing at 506, Vishal Apartment Baripath, Post- Mahendru, P.S.- Pirbahore, District- Patna- 800006. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

3.

The Deputy Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

4.

The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Budh Marg, Patna. 5.

The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Budh Marg, Patna. 6.

The District Education Officer, Patna.

7.

Sri Medho Das, Ex. District Education Officer, Patna now posted as Dy. Secretary Bihar School Examination Board Regional Office, Rajkiya Balak High School, Gardanibagh, Patna.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

None.

For the Respondent-State:

Mr.Subhash Chandra Mishra, SC-16 For the BSEB :

Mr. Amarendra Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-11-2020 In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for directing the respondent to release his retiral dues such as 10 percent gratuity and leave encashment equivalent to 300 days. 2.

Nobody has joined the court proceedings being held through video conferencing on behalf of the petitioner.

3.

Earlier also, on 29.06.2020, when the matter was taken up, nobody has joined the court proceedings being

2/2 held through video conferencing on behalf of the petitioner. 4.

The Court has been informed that link for joining the court proceedings being held through video conferencing was duly communicated to the counsel for the petitioner.

5.

It appears that the petitioner is not interested in pressing the writ petition.

6.

In that view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) kanchan/- , U