This was an oral order dismissing a writ petition. The petitioner did not appear in court. On a gist of the counter affidavit, the claim was for regularization of service. The court dismissed the petition due to non-prosecution.
Writ petition dismissed due to non-prosecution.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18045 of 2011
====================================================== Hari Chauhan .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : AC to AAG – 6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 5 27-06-2016 On call, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner either to press the petition or to make a prayer for adjournment. Learned AC to AAG- 6 by way of referring to the counter affidavit submits that the petitioner was engaged on part time job as sweeper –cum- cleaner for six days in a week from 4th April 1993 to 19th February 1996. His service was never regularized. He submits that after such a long time the petitioner is not entitled to claim any relief that too without any appointment letter. Be that as it may, since none appeared on behalf of the petitioner, the writ petition stands dismissed due to non prosecution. (Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/-
U
Hari Chauhan
The State of Bihar
Rakesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
