Ramakant Jha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16693 of 2011 =========================================================== Ramakant Jha S/o Late Baldeo Jha R/O Village- Jagdeo Nagar, Laliyahari, Ward No.9, P.S.-Mirchaibari, District - Katihar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary Home (Special), Patna

2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna

3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Purnia

4. The Superintendent of Police, Purnia

5. The Accountant General, Bihar, Birchand Patel Path, 'R' Block, Patna .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Kr. Jha, Adv.

Mr. Surya Kant Mishra, Adv.

For the State : Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the Accountant General : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 08-12-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Pursuant to order dated 30.10.2015 supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4 in which it has been stated that the petitioner never complied with the direction of the Court as contained in its order dated 30.10.2015.

By order dated 30.10.2015, on the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner for listing the case after four weeks to enable him to appear before the Superintended of Police, Purnea to complete the formalities, the case had been adjourned. On 27.11.2015, on prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, by way of indulgence, the case was adjourned. On 01.12.2015, as there was no unanimity at the

Patna High Court CWJC No.16693 of 2011 dt.08-12-2015 2/2 Bar as to whether the exercise directed by order dated 30.10.2015 has been completed, on a joint prayer, the matter was directed to be listed to 07th December, 2015. Today, only the State has filed a supplementary counter affidavit but the same has not been done by the petitioner.

In view of the aforesaid, the Court having given extraordinary indulgence to the petitioner while directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner subject to him appearing before the Superintendent of Police, Purnea and complete the formalities within four weeks, the same not having been done even after two further indulgence, the Court does not feel the necessity to keep the matter pending. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed off. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar U T