Kapildeo Prasad @ Kapil Deo Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5321 of 2015 ====================================================== Kapildeo Prasad @ Kapil Deo Singh son of Late Kishun Prasad , resident of village- Mirajapur Nohata, P.S. - Fatuha, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

2. The Collector, Patna, District- Patna.

3. The Circle Officer, Fatuha, District - Patna

4. The Administrator, Bihar State Religious Trust Board, Vidayapati Marg , Patna.

5. Dinesh Tiwary son of Haridwar Tiwari resident of Mohalla- Bankipur Gorakh, P.S.- Fatuha, District- Patna

6. Tunna Thathera@ Nand Kishor Thathera, son of Late Laxmi Thatheta, resident of Mohalla - Purani Chowk, P.S. - Fatuha, District- Patna. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate with Mr. Anirudh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. J.S. Barnwal, GA5 For respondent no.5 : Mr.J.S.Arora, Advocate For respondent no.6 : Mr.Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Advocate & Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the BSRT Board : Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, Sr. Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ) 04-04-2016 Heard Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. J.S.Barnwal, learned Government Advocate No. 5, appearing on behalf of the State-respondents, and Mr.J.S.Arora, learned counsel for the respondent no.5. Heard also Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent no.6 and Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, learned Senior counsel, for the respondent-Board.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5321 of 2015 (4) dt.04-04-2016 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application with liberty to take recourse to appropriate provision of law.

No objection has been raised to the prayer for withdrawal made by the petitioner.

In view of the above and in the interest of justice, this application is hereby disposed of as withdrawn with liberty granted to the petitioner to take recourse to appropriate provisions of law including, if so advised, institute appropriate suit in a Court of competent jurisdiction.

(I.A. Ansari, ACJ) (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J) Shashi.

U