M/S Sudesh Kumar Singh And Co. Const. Pvt. Ltd. v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16774 of 2022 ====================================================== M/S Sudesh Kumar Singh and Co. Const. Pvt. Ltd. through its M.D. Sudesh Kumar Singh, (male) aged about 58 Years, S/o- Brijnandan Prasad Singh, Resident Purani Bazar, Near Girish Talkij, P.S.- Jamui, District- Jamui. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Rural Works Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary Rural Works Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Engineer- In- Chief Rural Works Department Vishveshwarya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

4.

The Chief Engineer- 2 Rural Work Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 5.

The Superintending Engineer Rural Works Department, Work Circle Munger.

6.

The Executive Engineer Rural Works Department Work Division, Jamui, District- Jamui.

7.

The State Quality Coordinator Rural Works Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashi Bhushan Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Archana Meenakshee, GP-6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 29-03-2023 It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the order which was passed in this case on 22nd of March, 2023 has been typed in the order sheet relating to CWJC No. 8374 of 2022, which was listed at serial no. 44 in the cause list on the same day, whereas the present case was listed at serial no. 45 on that day. Similarly the order which was passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8374 of 2022 has been typed by the steno erroneously in C.W.J.C. No. 16774 of 2022.

Patna High Court CWJC No.16774 of 2022(4) dt.29-03-2023 2/2 Having noticed the aforesaid facts, the error requires to be corrected.

As such, the order dated 22nd March, 2023 passed in the present case is corrected to the extent that the same be read as under:

"Learned counsel for the respondents submits that a counter affidavit has been filed. The petitioner has been declared qualified as L1.

Keeping in view thereto, the petitioner prays to withdraw the petition as having become infructuous. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly." The warning is issued to the concerned steno not to commit such a mistake in future.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Amrendra/- Item No. 3 U