Md. Mojammil Husain @ Md. Mojamil Husain v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL REVIEW No.254 of 2024 In Letters Patent Appeal No.2093 of 2016 ====================================================== 1.

Md. Mojammil Husain @ Md. Mojamil Husain S/o - Md. Mosaiyad Khan, Resident of village - Piparpati, Panchayat Donwar, Police Station - Jogapatti, Dist. - West Champaran.

2.

Tajma Khatun, W/o - Najre Alam, D/o Alauddin Ansari, Resident of village - Padraun, Police Station - Jogapatti, Dist.- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, West Champaran. 2.

The Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar. 3.

The District Education Officer cum District Programme Officer, West Champaran.

4.

The Block Education Officer, Yogapatti Block, West Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. AC to AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD) 22-12-2025 Re: I.A. 01 of 2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. Respondents/petitioners in this case are seeking condonation of delay of 1666 days in filing of the present review application. It is a case of the petitioners that the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 2093 of 2016 came to be passed on 08.01.2018. After the said judgment, the petitioners

Patna High Court C. REV. No.254 of 2024(3) dt.22-12-2025 2/2 obtained some information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 about the status of their schools, where they were appointed and working. The information came as back as on 05.10. 2018.

3. After 05.10.2018, why no review application was filed is not explained even by a wishper in the application seeking condonation of delay. The petitioners have directly come to the Covid period stating that during the Covid period the petitioners were unable to approach the High Court. This Court finds that the Covid period came in 15.03.2020 and it remained till 28.02.2022. This review application has been registered on 21.08.2024.

4. The delay is inordinate and there is no cogent reason, much less sufficient reason has been shown for purpose of condonation of delay.

5. Prayer is refused.

6. I.A. No. 01 of 2024 is dismissed.

7. As a result of dismissal of I.A, the Civil Review stands dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) (Sourendra Pandey, J) aditya/- U