Ajay Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15819 of 2008 ====================================================== Ajay Kumar Sharma, s/o Sri Ram Bhagwan Singh, resident of villageBishambharpur Post Office - Sutihar, Police Station - Derani District - Saran At present R/o Muhalla P.H.E.D. Colony Dighikalan Post Office Dighi Kalan Police Station Hajipur Sadar, District Vaishali Hajipur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Commissioner- cum- Secretary, Public Heath Engineering Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The Commissioner -cum- Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

4. The Chief Engineer, P.H.E. Department, Govt. of Bihar at Patna

5. The Executive Engineer Public Health Engineering Parmandal (Division ) Muzaffarpur .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Singh No. 2 For the Respondent/s : AC to GA - 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-03-2017 Heard Sri Uma Shankar Singh No. 2, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GA No. 12. The present writ petition was filed with a prayer to direct the respondents to grant similar relief as was granted to the juniors to the petitioner.

In this case a counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent no. 5 on 10th December 2009. However, it was served on Sri Uma Shankar Singh No. 2 , learned counsel for the petitioner on 21.09.2015 and on his prayer the case was adjourned. Learned State Counsel on earlier occasion also by way of referring to the facts stated in the counter affidavit had said

Patna High Court CWJC No.15819 of 2008 (3) dt.03-03-2017 2/2 that the grievance of the petitioner has already been redressed. Again it has been reiterated that the fact regarding redressal of the grievance of the petitioner has been stated in paragraph no. 7 of the counter affidavit. The petitioner has not filed any rejoinder to the counter affidavit. Meaning thereby, that the fact stated in the counter affidavit is not in dispute.

In view of the facts and circumstances particularly the stand taken in the counter affidavit, there is no reason to keep the matter pending.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

It goes without saying that in view of the statement made in paragraph no. 7 of the counter affidavit the petitioner is entitled to get all the consequential benefits. (Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U