Petitioner challenged entitlement for medical reimbursement. Court dismissed writ petition as infructuous, noting medical reimbursement was already allowed by respondents during pendency.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous.
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 577 of 2015
======================================================
Dr Ajit Kumar Sharma S/o Sri Raj Nandan Sharma resident of Western Patel Nagar, Adarsh Nagar Colony, Road No. 6 A, Patna - 800023
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr Madan Prasad Singh No-2, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr Manish Kumar, GP VIII ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
6 29-01-2019 Learned counsel are in agreement that as per entitlement, the petitioner’s medical reimbursement has been allowed by the respondents during pendency of the writ petition.
Writ petition is, therefore, dismissed as infructuous.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J)
M.E.H. /-
U
Dr Ajit Kumar Sharma
The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry and Fishery Department, Government of Bihar
Madhuresh Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
