Sri Rajendra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna Namely Mr. Deepak Kumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No 4726 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 5015 of 2014 ====================================================== 1.

Sri Rajendra Prasad Son of Sri Jhulan Prasad Resident of MohallaGorakshni, Police Station- Sasaram, District- Rohtas, Presently posted at DRDA, Rohtas, Sasaram.

2.

Najib Ahmad Son of Late Latif Ahmad Resident of Mohalla- Bhabhua Town, Police Station- Bhabhua, District- Kaimur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through The Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna namely Mr. Deepak Kumar 2.

Ther Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna namely Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary. 3.

The Deputy Secretary, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna Mrs. Kiran Kumari.

4.

The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram namely Mr. Pankaj Dixit. 5.

The District Rural Development Agency, Rohtas through the Deputy Development Commissioner, Rohtas at Sasaram namely Mr. Om Prakash Paul.

6.

The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, DRDA, Rohtas at Sasaram Mr. Om Prakash Paul.

7.

Sri Pandey Mukti Nath Son of Late Pandey Sidhnath Resident of Mohalla Kotha Toli, Police Station- Sasaram, District- Rohtas. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

N O N E For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr Anjani Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 24-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the State.

Under the order dated 20.07.2018 passed in the writ proceedings, the case of three writ petitioners was directed to be considered and disposed of by reasoned and speaking order subject to representation being filed by the petitioners.

Patna High Court MJC No.4726 of 2018(3) dt.24-08-2022 2/2 Paragraph 6 of the show cause states that the representation of the petitioners has been considered and disposed of. Learned State Counsel draws attention of the Court towards the relevant consideration, as contained in the Resolution dated 05.03.2019 bearing Memo No 415177 whereby and whereunder petitioner No 1 has been absorbed in service. By reasoned and speaking order dated 05.03.2019 bearing Memo No 415171, the case of petitioners No 2 and 3 has been rejected.

In view of the compliance of the order of the Writ Court, these proceedings need not be kept pending. Petitioners' counsel is not present in Court. This application is disposed of, however, with liberty to the petitioners to assail the order dated 05.03.2019 bearing Memo No 415171 as well as Memo No 415177, if any further grievances are remaining.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U