← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/2751/2014dismissed

Sujata Kumari And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2025-01-30Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2751 of 2014 ====================================================== 1.

Sujata Kumari and Ors Daughter Of Late Krishna Prasad @ Ram Resident Of Pandit B.N. Jha Path, Hindi Vidya Peeth Chhota Gate, In The Hanuman Mandir Gali, Deoghar, Jharkhand 2.

Sudhanshu Shekhar Son Of Late Krishna Prasad @ Ram, Minor And Represented Through His Sister Petitioner No. 1 Resident Of Pandit B.N. Jha Path, Hindi Vidya Peeth Chhota Gate, In The Hanuman Mandir Gali, Deoghar, Jharkhand ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principle Secretary, Department of Food and Consumer Protection, Bihar, Patna 2.

The President, State Commission For Consumer Grievances Redressal, Bihar, Patna 3.

The District Magistrate, Jamui 4.

The President, District Consumer Forum, Jamui 5.

The Accountant General, Patna Null Null 6.

Pyari Devi Wife Of Late Krishna Ram Resident Of Mohalla- Karshmir Ganj, Post- Mashauri, District- Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ramadhar Singh, Gp-25 For the A.G.

:

Mr. Ram Kinder Choubey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-01-2025 On the last occasion, learned counsel for the petitioners who was on the record informed this Court that the petitioners have taken no objection from his office and on the day the Court has been pleased to post this case today. But, today after repeated calls no one appears on behalf of the petitioners which suggest that still Vakalatnama has not been filed on behalf of the petitioners. However, learned counsel for

Patna High Court CWJC No.2751 of 2014(6) dt.30-01-2025 2/2 the State as well as learned counsel for the Accountant General are present.

2. Accordingly, this writ application stands dismissed for default for non-prosecution.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) ajay/- U