Dilip Kumar Mishra v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14763 of 2018 ====================================================== Dilip Kumar Mishra, Son of Late Jata Mishra by profession Advocate, R/o Village- Andahara, P.O.+ P.S.- Parsauni, Dist.- Sitamarhi, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The Union Of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, New Delhi.

2.

The High Court of Judicature at Patna through its Registrar General, Patna. 3.

State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Department of Law, Bihar, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Bindeshwar Sah, Adv.

For the Respondents :

Mr. Lalit Kishore, AG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 06-01-2020 The petition filed on 27.07.2018 is listed for hearing for the first time today before the Court.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

Petitioner has prayed for the following relief: "For issuance of a wit in the nature of mandamus/appropriate writ or order or direction to the Respondent 1 to sanction 170 posts of Judges in Patna High Court and further to fill vacant sanctioned posts of Judges within the period specified by this Hon'ble Court for providing fast and time bound legal and judicial remedies to the people of Bihar."

Patna High Court CWJC No.14763 of 2018(2) dt.06-01-2020 2/2 After the matter was heard for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner shall be content if a direction is issued to the concerned respondents to consider and decide the representation, which the petitioner shall be making afresh within a period of four weeks from today. Learned counsel for the State states that upon receipt of such request, if any, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law, expeditiously and positively within a period of three months from the date of receipt thereof. Equally, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to such alternative remedies as are otherwise available in accordance with law.

We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law, before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) P.K.P./- U