Ram Chandra Prasad v. Bihar State Electricity Boardand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16850 of 2007 ======================================================

1. Meena Devi, wife of late Ram Chandra Prasad, resident of Village - Mokrampur, P.S. - Noorsarai, Dist. Nalanda.

2. Avinash Kumar, son of late Ram Chandra Prasad, resident of Village - Mokrampur, P.S. - Noorsarai, Dist. Nalanda .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Bihar State Electricity Board, through its Chairman, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

2. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

3. Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

4. Joint Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

5. Electrical Superintending Engineer, Nalanda Electrical Circle, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda.

6. Electrical Executive Engineer, M.R.T. Division Biharsharif, District - Nalanda .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Braj Nandan Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-01-2017 Re. Interlocutory Application No. 6344/2015.

Interlocutory Application No.6344/2015 has been preferred since sole petitioner Ram Chandra Prasad died on 10.06.2009, but the family was not aware about pendency of the present writ application, hence the substitution petition was not filed earlier. Ram Chandra Prasad died leaving behind his legal heirs wife Meena devi and son Avinash Kumar. The Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of the proposed substituted heirs of deceased sole petitioner.

Patna High Court CWJC No.16850 of 2007 (12) dt.30-01-2017 2/2 Learned counsel for the respondent - South Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd. has no objection in allowing the interlocutory application.

Accordingly, the interlocutory application is allowed. Re. CWJC No. 16850/2007.

Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the application since the petitioners are satisfied with the appellate order dated 30.10.2007 contained in annexure-B to the counter affidavit with a liberty that the petitioners will represent before the respondent authorities for implementation of the appellate order dated 30.10.2007 hence the authority concerned be directed to dispose of the representation within stipulated time frame of four weeks.

Permission is accorded.

It is expected that the authority concerned will dispose of the representation of the petitioner within four weeks of receipt of the same.

The writ application is dismissed as withdrawn with the abovementioned liberty.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Ashwini/- U