Disposing of writ applications challenging orders by the Joint Director, the Court held that the disputes stood resolved in lower courts and became infructuous pending the Supreme Court outcome.
Applications disposed of as infructuous due to resolution of dispute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Patna High Court CWJC No.13204 of 1992 (7) dt.06-04-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13204 of 1992
====================================================== Bhikhar Singh & Anr .... .... Petitioner/s Versus State & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13119 of 1992 ====================================================== Bhikhar Singh & Anr .... .... Petitioner/s Versus State & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13083 of 1992 ====================================================== Bhikhar Singh & Anr .... .... Petitioner/s Versus State & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13117 of 1992 ====================================================== Bhikhar Singh & Anr .... .... Petitioner/s Versus State & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13084 of 1992 ====================================================== Bhikhar Singh & Anr .... .... Petitioner/s Versus State & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13205 of 1992 ====================================================== Bhikhar Singh & Anr
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus State & Ors
Patna High Court CWJC No.13204 of 1992 (7) dt.06-04-2015
.... .... Respondent/s
| ======================= Civil Writ Jurisdi ======================= Bhikhar Singh & Anr State of Bihar & Ors ======================= |
=============================== with ction Case No.13296 of 1992 =============================== .... .... Petitioner/s Versus .... .... Respondent/s =============================== |
|
|---|---|---|
| Appearance : (In CWJC No.13204 of 1992) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Respondent/s : Mr. (In CWJC No.13119 of 1992) |
Ramashish (Gp6) |
|
| For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mr. For the Respondent/s : Mr. (In CWJC No.13083 of 1992) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mr. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mr. (In CWJC No.13117 of 1992) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mr. (In CWJC No.13084 of 1992) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Respondent/s : Mr. (In CWJC No.13205 of 1992) |
Ramashish Shailendra Kumar Singh (Gp6) Ramashish Shailendra Kumar Singh (Gp6) Manoj Kumar -1 Ramashish (Gp6) Manoj Kumar -1 Ramashish (Gp6) |
|
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mr. |
Ramashish Shialendra Kumar Singh |
|
For the Respondent/s : Mr. (In CWJC No.13296 of 1992) |
(Gp6) |
|
| For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mr. Mr. |
Ramashish Murari Nr.Chaudhary Manoj Kumar |
|
For the Respondent/s : Mr. |
(Gp6) |
|
| ======================= CORAM: HONOURABLE M SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER |
=============================== R. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI |
|
| 7 | 06-04-2015 It appears that the di |
spute involved in the present batch of |
| applications under Article | 226 of the Constitution of India | |
| challenging the orders | passed by the Joint Director of |
Patna High Court CWJC No.13204 of 1992 (7) dt.06-04-2015
Consolidation in different revision cases was involved in F.A. No. 40 of 1978 which came to be finally decided on 27.02.1997. A Letters Patent Appeal preferred against the judgment of this Court in First Appeal, dated 27.02.1997 has been decided by judgment and order dated 18.04.2007.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents appears to be correct in his submission that the dispute in the present application stands resolved at least up to the level of Division Bench of this Court and in such view of the matter, these applications have become infructuous.
It is, however, stated at the Bar that aggrieved parties have approached Supreme Court in this matter.
It goes without saying that the claims of the parties will depend upon the final outcome of the matter before the Supreme Court, if any.
These writ applications accordingly stands disposed of.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)
Saif/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ applications filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging orders passed by the Joint Director have become infructuous due to resolution of the dispute.
Bhikhar Singh & Anr
State & Ors
Chakradhari Sharan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
