Patna High CourtC. REV./257/2015disposed

The Chief Engineer Bihar Police Buildings Constructions Corporation And ANR v. Maa Sharda Construction Through Its Partner Sri Arun Kumar Singh And ORS

2016-10-26Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.257 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10481 of 2015 ======================================================

1. The Chief Engineer, Bihar Police Building Construction Corporation, Patna.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Bihar Police Buildings Construction Corporation, Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Maa Sharda Construction through its Partner Sri Arun Kumar Singh Son of Sri Krishna Singh Resident of Mohalla- New Area, ward no. 5, P.s Nagar, District Aurangabad.

2. The State of Bihar through Secretary B.C.D Department

3. The Principal Secretary, Home (Police), Department Government of Bihar.

4. Ganesh Kumar son of not know, resident of Mohalla- RMS Colony, Road No-4, Kankarbagh, P.S. Kankarbagh, District- Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prasoon Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, GA-1 Kumar Ravish, AC to GA-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 26-10-2016 The present civil review application seeks correction(s) in the name of the respondents whom the Court in the order dated 27.07.2015 had directed the petitioner to represent. It is stated that the tender notice was floated by the Bihar Police Buildings Construction Corporation (for short "The Corporation). The Corporation and other Authority of the Corporation were impleaded as party respondent in C.W.J.C. No. No. 10481 of 2015, but the copy of the brief was not served. This

Patna High Court C. REV. No.257 of 2015 (8) dt.26-10-2016 2/2 was pointed out by the Stamp Reporter also. On the request of the petitioner, respondent no. 5 was impleaded as the party respondent and the writ petition was disposed of permitting the petitioner to file a representation against selection of respondent no. 4 of the writ petition before the said respondent. Although, a copy has been served on the counsel for the petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 10481 of 2015 inasmuch as the name of the counsel appears but none has appeared on his behalf. Considering the statement(s) made in the application as well as in the supplementary affidavit filed today and after hearing the submission of the parties, I am persuaded to allow this application to the effect that in the concluding part of the order dated 27.07.2015 passed in C.W.J.C. No.

10481 of 2014, the respondent no. 5 shall stand substituted by respondent no. 2. As I have modified the order, the time granted thereunder to file a representation is extended by two (02) weeks from today. The Civil Review Application stands disposed of.