← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/958/2025disposed

Ramawati Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-23Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.958 of 2025 ====================================================== Ramawati Devi Wife of Suresh Kumar Yadav, Resident of villageHarinarayanpur, P.O. Mehsi, P.S. Gadahiya O.P. (Madhuban), District- East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Election Authority, Bihar at Patna. 2.

The Registrar, Co-operative, Bihar at Patna.

3.

The Collector, East Champaran at Motihari.

4.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Motihari, District - East Champaran. 5.

Mr. Rajnish Kumar Son of not known, The B.D.O.-cum-the Returning Officer (PAACS Election), Madhuban, District - East Champaran. 6.

Mr. Navin Kumar Dubey Son of not known, thre Program Officer, Madhuban-cum-the Assistant Returning Officer, PAACS Election, Madhuban, District- East Champaran.

7.

The Block Co-operative Officer, Madhuban, District- East Champaran. 8.

Shri Binod Kumar Singh Son of not known to the petitioner, Resident of Village - Harinarayanpur, P.O.- Mehsi, P.S. - Gadahiya O.P. (Madhuban), District- East Champaran.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amarendra Nath Verma, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Ms.Divya Verma, A.C. to AAG-3 For Election Authority : Mr.M.K.Thakur, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction submits that the petitioner has already filed the statutory election petition before the authority concerned, and in that view of the matter, the present writ application has become infructuous. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CWJC No.958 of 2025(2) dt.23-01-2025 2/2 seeks permission to withdraw this writ application.

3. Permission is accorded.

4. This writ application is dismissed as withdrawn as having become infructuous.

5. Respondent No.2 is directed to conclude the election petition filed on behalf of the petitioner within a period of six months after hearing all concerned.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U