Patna High CourtC. REV./50/2018dismissed

Hare Ram Sahni v. The Union Of India And ORS

2019-01-09Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.50 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.601 of 2012 ====================================================== Hare Ram Sahni, Son of Late Dular Chand Sahani, Resident of VillageDulaur, P.O.- Pirapur, P.S.- Jandaha, District- Vaishali ... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supply, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

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

3. The Food Corporation of India, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

4. The District Magistrate, Samastipur.

5. The Senior Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India, Regional OfficeArunachal Bhawan, Exhibition Road, Patna.

6. The Food Corporation of India, Office of the General Manager (Regional), West Bengal Region-6, Royal Street, Kolkata- 700016.

7. The Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India, Regional OfficeArunachal Bhawan, Exhibition Road, Patna.

8. The Divisional Manager, Food Corporation of India, Kashipur, Samastipur.

9. The Director of Rationing, Govt. of West Bengal, West Bengal ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Vishambhar Prasad, AC to AAG V For the FCI :

Mr. Prabhakar Tekriwal, Adv.

For the UOI :

Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 09-01-2019 Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this review application has been preferred under wrong advice as the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 601 of 2012, dated 03.04.2012, was an order wherein a direction was issued for payment of gratuity amount to the petitioner and was a consented order. He submits that a letters patent appeal was preferred being L.P.A. No. 104 of 2014 against the order passed by the single Judge and a liberty was granted to the petitioner to prefer a review

Patna High Court C. REV. No.50 of 2018(4) dt.09-01-2019 2/2 application.

Since, the order passed by the writ Court was a consented order by which a direction was given to pay the gratuity amount, the review application has no merit. It is, accordingly, dismissed.

The petitioner is at liberty to pursue his other remedy as available in accordance with law.

(Nilu Agrawal, J) Shamshad/- U