Patna High CourtCWJC/2679/2011disposed

Lal Babu Yadav And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-06-27Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay1 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2679 of 2011 ======================================================

1. Lal Babu Yadav, Son of Late Mukhlal Yadav, resident of village Katai Tikar, P.O. Bhatapar Rani, P.S. Bhatapar Rani, District - Dewaria (Uttar Pradesh), Presently posted as Assistant Teacher, Gandhi Smarak High School, Bhore, P.S.- Bhore, District - Gopalganj.

2. Krishna Kumar Pandy, Son of Sri Rambalak Pandey, resident of village Sohanpar, P.O. Bhatpar Rani, P.S.- Bhatpar Rani, DistrictDewaria (Uttar Pradesh) , presently posted as Assistant Teacher, Town High School, Mairwa, P.S. Mairwa, District- Siwan.

3. Anant Kumar @ Bachcha Rai, son of Late Sumeshwar Rai, resident of village Jagarnath Chapra, Psot Ghanti, P.S. Bhalani, District Dewaria(Uttar Pradesh), presently posted as Assistant Teacher, Adhya High School, Patedhi, P.S. Patedhi, Siwan. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Secondary Education, Human Resource Developoment Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Director, Secondary Education, Human Resource Developoment Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saran Division, at Chhapra.

6. The District Superintendent of Education,Siwan.

7. The District Superintendent of Education, Gopalganj.

8. The District Education Officer, Gopalganj. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sandip Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. N. H. Khan, SC-1 Mrs. Babita Kumar, AC to SC-1 For Respondent no.8 : Mr. R. K. Tiwary, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 27-06-2018 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the writ application, the same has become infructuous. It is disposed of, as having become infructuous. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Uday/- U