#Patna HC Archives - Prime Legal

30 Nov

Authorities Directed To Resolve The Grievance Regarding The Bid: Patna High Court

Prime Legal

Blog, blog #Cases, #law, #Legal News, #Legal Report, #Patna HC

Citation: CWJC No.5556 of 2023

Decided On: 01-11-2023

Coram: Honourable Mr. Justice P. B. Bajanthri And Honourable Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Jha

Introduction:

In the instant writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

To issue a writ in the nature of writ of certiorari to quash and cancel the result of the bid held on 10.03.2023 at 11:00 A.M. 11.50 A.M. (Annexure-3) for settlement of parking stand of scootere/motorcycle, car/other four wheelers, auto (vikaram), auto (bajaj) at south side karbigahiya of Patna Junction Railway Station for 3 years in favour of M/s Maruti Foundation.
To quash and cancel all other action or actions, order or orders agreement if any executed in favour of Respondent in continuation or in relation to the aforementioned settlement being arbitrary, illegal, malafide and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Facts:

Petitioner and eight respondents alongwith others participated in bid for settlement of parking stand of Scooter/Motorcycle, Car/other four wheelers, auto (Vikaram), auto (Bajaj) at south side Karbigahiya of Patna Junction Railway Station for a period of three years.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is an arbitrary decisions on behalf of the respondents in so far as the acceptance of bid with reference to the timing on 10.03.2023. Prima facie, it is too technical and the same cannot be adjudicated under Article 226. The concerned authority/competent authority has failed to take any decision either accepting or rejecting the petitioner’s claim.

Court’s Analysis and Judgement:

It is also submitted that in not awarding contract to the petitioner with reference to his bid, the respondent railway authorities have already put themselves into loss. These are all the materials information which is required to be taken note of by the competent authority before deciding the petitioner’s grievance dated 13.03.2023 and 20.03.2023.

The concerned authorities is directed to pass a detailed speaking order on the grievance of the petitioner and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of one month. With that direction the writ is disposed by the court.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written By : Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement

30 Nov

Court Decides To Quash The Case When The Parties Agree On Settlement: Patna High Court

Prime Legal

Blog #Cases, #law, #Legal News, #Legal Report, #Patna HC

Title: Deepak Kumar v State of Bihar

Citation: CR. MISC. No.40319 of 2022

Decided On: 01-11-2023

Coram: Honourable Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma

Introduction:

The present quashing application has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 21.03.2022 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura in connection with Sheikhpura Mahila P.S. Case No. 38 of 2019, G.R. No. 674 of 2019 whereby charges have been framed against the petitioners under Sections 341, 323, 354(B), 504, 452 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Facts:

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that after the police submitted charge-sheet, cognizance was taken and after framing of the charges, on intervention of the well wishers, the parties have compromised the case. It is next submitted that the opposite party herein does not intend to pursue with the case or the trial.

Mr. Purushotam Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party concurs with the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that he has instruction to make submissions on behalf of the opposite party that the opposite party does not have any objection in the event if the order dated 21.03.2022 passed by the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate.

Court’s Analysis and Judgement:

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the opposite party and evaluating that both the parties agree on the settlement and there is no party who wants to pursue the case. The court quashed the Case No. 38 of 2019, G.R. No. 674 of 2019 whereby charges have been framed against the petitioners under Sections 341, 323, 354(B), 504, 452 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Written By : Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view the judgement

22 Nov

Nothing Left To Be Decided As The Subject Matter Advertisement Was 8 Years Old: Patna High Court

Prime Legal

Uncategorized #Jobs, #law, #Legal Report, #Patna HC

Title: Dr. Veena Kumari v The Bihar Agricultural University

Citation: CWJC No.12028 of 2014

Coram: Honourable Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy

Decided On: 04-10-2023

Introduction:

The instant application was filed for quashing the Letter no. 1041 dated 4.7.2014 whereby the letter issued to the petitioner by the University calling the petitioner for interview to the post of Assistant Professor-cum-Junior Scientist for discipline Agriculture Economics vide Advertisement no.06/2013 dated 4.9.2013 was illegally recalled.

Facts:

It is submitted that the call letter for the interview had been held on 15.07.2014 for the post of Agriculture Economics was wrongly due to typographical/technical error. It is mentioned here that the petitioner namely Dr. Veena Kumari earlier moved this Hon’ble Court vide CWJC No. 1415 of 2008 for the same issue, the Hon’ble Court has passed order and rejected the grievance of the petitioner on 04.08.2011 for consideration of her candidature on the basis of her M.Sc. degree without having corresponding degree at the under graduate level on the ground that so long as the eligibility condition prescribed under Para-17.2 of RAU Act & Statute.

Court’s Analysis and Judgement:

the interview which is the subject matter of the instant application having taken place more than 8 years ago. So in present case there is nothing remaining to be decided on, hence the writ application was disposed by the court.

Written by- Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement

9 Nov

Application In The Prescribed Manner Is Required For The Remedy Under Rule 12-B Of Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Rules: High Court Of Patna

Prime Legal

Blog #judgement, #Legal News, #Patna HC, #Procedure, #Report

Title: Binod Kumar v State of Bihar

Citation: CWJC No.15688 of 2023

Coram: Honourable Mr. Justice P. B. Bajanthri And Honourable Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya

Decided On: 08-11-2023

Introduction:

In the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

For issuance of writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions, commanding the respondents to unseal the petitioner’s Cement Godown situated in the village- Rudahan, Area- 5400 Sq.fit, which has been sealed in connection with Bochahan P.S. Case No. 318/2023, registered for an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

Facts:

The subject matter of premises, namely, Khata No. 109, Kheshra No. 10 about 5400 Sq. ft., cement godown situated in village – Rudahan, P.S. – Bochahan, District – Muzaffarpur is stated to be involved for the offences under the Bihar Excise Act, 2016. It is reliably learnt that about 279 litres of foreign liquor was seized from the aforementioned godown and it has been seized. The present petition is for de-sealing.

Learned counsel for the State-respondent submitted that having regard to the huge quantity seized and it is not appropriate for this Court to direct for de-sealing the premises. Further, it is also pointed out that confiscation proceedings is under going.

Court’s Judgement and Analysis:

Petitioner has submitted representation on 05.10.2023, there is no action on the part of the concerned respondent. At the same time, petitioner has remedy under Rule 12-B of Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2022. But the petitioner is required to submit application in the prescribed form in respect of de-sealing of seized premises.

Therefore the petitioner was directed to approach the concerned authority while making application under the Rule 12-B of Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2022.

Application is to submitted before the competent authority, the competent authority is directed to take note of all the factual materials and proceed to pass order and communicate the same to the petitioner within a reasonable period of three weeks from the date of receipt of petitioner’s application under Rule 12-B of Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2022.

Written by- Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement