Krishna Singh (Wrongly Mentioned As Sri Krishna Prasad In The Impugned Notice) v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2233 of 2022 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7868 of 2018 ====================================================== 1.

Krishna Singh (wrongly mentioned as Sri Krishna Prasad in the impugned notice) son of Late Monohar Mahto (wrongly mentioned as Monohar Prasad in the impugned notice), resident of Village-Aungari, P.O. and P.S.-Aungari, Block-Ekangarsarai, District-Nalanda.

2.

Ram Pratap Singh (wrongly mentioned as Sri Ram Pratap Prasad in the impugned notice) son of Late Monohar Mahto (wrongly mentioned as Monohar Prasad in the impugned notice), resident of Village-Aungari, P.O. and P.S.-Aungari, Block-Ekangarsarai, District-Nalanda. 3.

Dinesh Prasad son of Late Monohar Mahto (wrongly mentioned as Monohar Prasad in the impugned notice), resident of Village-Aungari, P.O. and P.S.- Aungari, Block-Ekangarsarai, District-Nalanda. 4.

Ram Chandra Prasad @ Ramji Prasad (wrongly mentioned as Ramjeevan Prasad in the impugnedd notice) son of Kheman Mahto (wrongly mentioned as Tetar Mahto in the impugned notice), resident of Village-Aungari, P.O. and P.S.-Aungari, Block-Ekangarsarai, District-Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The District Magistrate, Nalanda.

3.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Hilsa, Nalanda.

4.

The Circle Officer, Ekangarsarai, Nalanda.

5.

The Anchal Amin, Ekangarsarai, Nalanda.

6.

The I/C Circle Inspector, Ekangarsarai, Nalanda. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rishi Raj Sinha (Sc19) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2023 1.

The present petition has been filed for restoration of a writ petition bearing CWJC No.7868 of 2018, which has stood dismissed on account of non-prosecution by an order

Patna High Court MJC No.2233 of 2022(2) dt.15-09-2023 2/2 dated 01.08.2022.

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 petition was dismissed on account of non- prosecution.

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 proper to restore the aforesaid writ petition bearing CWJC No.7868 of 2018 to its original file. 4.

The present restoration petition stands allowed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) kanchan/- U