Allowed

Shakti Rai v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC2 Jan 2019MJC/5048/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed the restoration of Letters Patent Appeal No.887 of 2017 against the seventh respondent. The court condoned the delay in furnishing requisites for notice, extended the peremptory period, and directed the issuance of notice.

What did the court decide?

Permission to restre the appeal against the respondent in the LD Appeal on condonation of delay is granted; notice to the respondent is directed.

Shakti Rai Vs The State Of Bihar — Writ and Judicial Review | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.887 of 2017 In

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7338 of 2012

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Shakti Rai, Son of Sri Surendra Kumar Sinha, Resident of Village-Neem Chak Bathani, Tola- Gorai Bigha, P.O. Bathani, P.S. Neem Chak Bathani, District- Gaya.

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar.

¶8

The Collector, Gaya.

¶9

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Neem Chak Bathani, Gaya.

¶10

The Circle Officer, Neem Chak Bathani, Gaya.

¶11

The Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Territory Office, Patna.

¶12

The Territory Manager (L.P.G.), Bharat Petroleum Corporation, Fatuha Industrial Area, Fatuha, Patna.

¶13

Smt. Priya Gupta, D/o Sri Avind Kumar, W/o Sri Dharmendra Kumar, R/o Biharsharif, P.S. Sohsarai, Distt.-Nalanda.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

======================================================

¶16

with

¶17

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 5048 of 2018 In

¶18

Letters Patent Appeal No.887 of 2017

¶19

======================================================

¶20

Shakti Rai, Son of Sri Surendra Kumar Sinha, Resident of Village- Neem Chak Bathani, Tola- Gorai Bigha, P.O. Bathani, P.S. Neem Chak Bathani, District- Gaya.

¶21

... ... Petitioner/s

¶22

Versus

¶23

The State of Bihar.

¶24

The Collector, Gaya.

¶25

The Sub Divisional Officer, Neem Chak Bathani, Gaya.

¶26

The Circle Officer, Neem Chak Bathani, Gaya.

¶27

The Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Territory Office, Patna.

¶28

The Territory Manager (L.P.G.) Bharat Petroleum Corporation, Fatuha Industrial Area, Fatuha, Patna.

¶29

Smt. Priya Gupta, D/o Shri Arvind Kumar, W/o Shri Dharmendra Kumar, R/o Biharsharif, P.S.- Sohsarai, District- Nalanda.

¶30

... ... Respondent/s

¶31

======================================================

¶32

Appearance :

¶33

(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 887 of 2017) For the Appellant/s : Mr.Rajeev Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. Raza Ahmad, AAG-5 (In Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 5048 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. Raza Ahmad, AAG- 5 ======================================================

¶34

Patna High Court LPA No.887 of 2017(12) dt.02-01-2019 2/3

¶35

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

¶36

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN)

¶37

12 02-01-2019 While the Letters Patent Appeal stands rejected as against the respondent no.7 for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 20.06.2018 whereby the appellant was directed to furnish requisites etc. for service of notice on respondent no.7, MJC No. 5048 of 2018 has been filed for restoration of the appeal as against the respondent no.7 with submission that the requisites have since been filed by the appellant on 18.12.2018.

¶38

Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant-petitioner submits that though there has been a lapse on behalf of appellant-petitioner in carrying out the peremptory order but the same has since been carried out, albeit with some delay which may be condoned.

¶39

Having heard learned counsel for the parties on the restoration application arising from MJC No.5048 of 2018 and having considered the submissions so advanced, we are persuaded to allow the furnishing of requisites for issuance of notice on respondent no.7 which has since been filed on 18.12.2018 as reported by Mr. Singh and taking note of the

¶40

Patna High Court LPA No.887 of 2017(12) dt.02-01-2019 3/3

¶41

circumstances we would extend the peremptory period as present in the order dated 20.06.2018 until 18.12.2018. Since the requisites have been filed, the appeal would stand restored to its original file as against respondent no.7.

¶42

MJC No. 5048 of 2018 is allowed.

¶43

Office is directed to issue notice to respondent no.7 and put up the appeal after service of notice/appearance of respondent no.7 or on 13.02.2019 whichever is earlier under the appropriate heading.

¶44

(Jyoti Saran, J)

¶45

( Arvind Srivastava, J)

¶46

Skpathak/Anjula

¶47

Shakti Rai v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakti Rai v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Anil Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Mukesh Kumar Prasad Vs Kumari Shweta

Gaurishankar Pandey Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Most. Geeta Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Birendra Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.