Asha Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3851 of 2024 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2615 of 2022 ====================================================== 1.
Asha Devi wife of Late Pradeep Kumar Agrawal resident of Mohalla Puraniganj, P.S. Kasim Bazar, District- Munger. 2.
Karan Agrawal son of Late Pradeep Kumar Agrawal resident of Mohalla Puraniganj, P.S. Kasim Bazar, District- Munger. 3.
Sarita Agrawal daughter of Late Pradeep Kumar Agrawal resident of Mohalla Puraniganj, P.S. Kasim Bazar, District- Munger. 4.
Princi Agrawal daughter of Late Pradeep Kumar Agrawal resident of Mohalla Puraniganj, P.S. Kasim Bazar, District- Munger. 5.
Riya Agrawal daughter of Late Pradeep Kumar Agrawal resident of Mohalla Puraniganj, P.S. Kasim Bazar, District- Munger. 6.
Vinay Kumar Agrawal son of Late Shiv Kumar Agrawal resident of Mohalla Puraniganj, Agrawal Tola P.S. Kasim Bazar, District- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary Government of Bihar, Patna 2.
The Principal Secretary, Registration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Inspector General of Registration-cum-Prohibition of Excise Department , Government of Bihar, Patna 4.
The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary Registration-Cum- Prohibition of Excise Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 5.
The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Munger. 6.
The Additional Collector, Stamp, Munger.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Standing Counsel 11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 13-12-2024 1.
The present petition has been filed for restoration of a writ petition bearing CWJC No.2615 of 2022, which has stood dismissed on account of non-prosecution by an order dated
Patna High Court MJC No.3851 of 2024(2) dt.13-12-2024 2/2 22.10.2024.
2.
The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that since the counsel for the petitioners 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 petitioners 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.2615 of 2022 to its original file. 4.
The present restoration petition stands allowed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) kanchan/- U