Guriya Devi @ Gudiya Kumari v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3054 of 2024 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4403 of 2024 ====================================================== Guriya Devi @ Gudiya Kumari Wife of Krishna Yadav, resident of Village and P.O.- Telkathu, Gram Panchayat- Telkathu, P.S.- M.H. Nagar, BlockHasanpura, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director I.C.D.S., (Social Welfare Department), Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Divisional Commissioner, Saran at Chhapra. 5.

The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Siwan. 6.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, x 7.

The District Programme Officer (I.C.D.S.), Siwan. 8.

The Child Development Project Officer, Hasanpura, Siwan. 9.

The Assistant Director, District Child Protection Unit, Siwan. 10.

The Block Development Officer, Hasanpura, Siwan. 11.

The Block Statistical Officer, Hasanpura, Siwan. 12.

The Circle Officer, Hasanpura, Siwan.

13.

The Lady Supervisor, Hasanpura, Siwan.

14.

Bandana Devi, Wife of Nagendra Yadav, resident of Village and P.O.- Telkathu, Gram Panchayat- Telkathu, P.S.- M.H. Nagar, Block- Hasanpura, District- Siwan.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Government Advocate 13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 20-09-2024

1. The present petition has been filed for restoration of a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No.4403 of 2024, which has stood dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated

Patna High Court MJC No.3054 of 2024(2) dt.20-09-2024 2/2 22.03.2024.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the counsel for the petitioner was engaged in another Court, he could not appear when the case was called out for hearing, hence, the aforesaid writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution, thus a sympathetic view be taken and the aforesaid writ petition be restored to its original file.

3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as also considering the averments made in the present petition, I deem it fit and appropriate to direct for restoration of the aforesaid writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No.4403 of 2024 to its original file.

4. The present petition stands allowed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Saurav/- U