Petitioner sought correction of name in writ application. Court held no necessity as payment had been made and names likely identical. Writ dismissed.
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.9480 of 2015
======================================================
Pabia Devi, widow of Late Gupteshwar Prasad, resident of Mohalla- Pandey Patti, Police Station- Buxer (Muffassil), District- Buxer, PIN-807101.
... ... Petitioner/s
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9480 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jagdish Prasad For the Respondent/s : Mr. GP28- SMT. GEETA KUMARI ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL ORDER
5 21-09-2017 Payment has been made by the B.S.R.T.C. to Pavitra Devi. Counsel representing the present petitioner says that it is Pavitra Devi and not Pabia Devi, who has been somehow wrongly described in the writ application all through, therefore, correction should be permitted.
Nothing is required to be done. If payment has been made and if Pabia Devi and Pavitra Devi is the same, it makes no difference.
Writ is dismissed in view of the above.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)
Pawan/-
U
Pabia Devi
The State of Bihar
The Administrator, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation
The Financial advisor-cum-Chief Accounts Officer, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation
AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
