Petitioner challenged an order affecting his service. The Court found that the petitioner was already reinstated under an order dated 29.08.2020. Consequently, the writ application was no longer necessary.
Writ application 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.3421 of 2020
======================================================
Jeevachh Kumar, Son of Sri Baboolal Mahto, Resident of Village- Bakhra, P.O.- Bakhra, P.S.- Saraiya, District- Muzaffarpur, Pin Code- 843101 (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raju Giri, Advocate Mr.Santosh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Rewati Kant Raman, AC to SC11 Mr.Piyush Kumar Pandey, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER
2 14-09-2022 In view of petitioner’s reinstatement under order dated 29.08.2020 issued by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Muzaffarpur, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance raised in the writ application does not survive anymore.
Writ application is dismissed as infructuous.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J)
shashank/- U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ application survives after the petitioner's reinstatement.
Jeevachh Kumar
The State of Bihar
Madhuresh Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
