Prashant Kumar Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.98 of 2017 In Letters Patent Appeal No. 925 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Prashant Kumar Singh, Son of late Rajeshwar Rai, Resident of VillageKamla Gopalpur, Police Station- Maner, District- Patna.

2. Arun Kumar, Son of late Bhagwat Sharma, Resident of Yamuna Path behind P.N.B. Police Station- Gardanibagh, District- Patna.

3. Manjit Kumar, Son of Devendra Kumar, Resident of New Harnichak, Police Station- Beur, District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Director of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Bihar Agriculture Management & Extension Training Institute (BAMETD) Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Commissioner Agriculture Department, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. The Secretary, Agriculture Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar.

6. The District Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran.

7. The Dist. Agriculture Officer Bettiah West Champaran.

8. The District Development Commissioner, Bettiah, West Champaran. Respondent/ Opposite Parties 1st Set.

9. Chandra Mohan Kumar Tiwari Son of late Kishore Tiwari Resident of Mohalla- Shanti Nagar, Police Station- Bettiah Town, District- West Champaran.

.... .... Appellant/Opposite Party 2nd Set. ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P. K. Shahi, Senior Advocate Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG- 13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 08-05-2017 Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we find that after disposal of the original Letters Patent Appeal No.925 of 2014 on 08.03.2016 and during the pendency of the

Patna High Court C. REV. No.98 of 2017 (3) dt.08-05-2017 2/2 matter, the State Government has issued a clarification, Annexure-5 to the Review Application, on 22.06.2016. In view of the aforesaid clarification, no further review is required. The judgment in question shall not come in the way of the clarification. The clarification of the State Government shall prevail. However, right shall be available to any other individual to challenge the clarification, Annexure-5 to the Review Application, if permissible in law. With the aforesaid clarification, the review application is disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Nilu Agrawal, J) Sunil/- U