PRAMOD MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Kamal Nayan Chaubey, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant-writ petitioner with Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Advocate-on-record, and Mr. Atul Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 3. There is no appearance on behalf of the State or the respondent no. 2. Respondent nos. 4 to 6 are represented through Mr. Umesh Narayan Dubey.

(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records.

(3.) By the order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge put to challenge herein, the writ petition was dismissed on grounds of delay, inasmuch as in the opinion of the learned Single Judge, though the order under challenge in the writ petition was passed on 10.08.2001, the writ petition was preferred after a delay of 04 years in the year 2005. Apart therefrom, the learned Single Judge also took notice of the fact that some of the coparceners of the writ petitioner i.e. respondent nos. 4 to 6 had earlier moved this Court in CWJC No. 11853 of 2001 but had chosen to withdraw the writ petition. It is taking note of the laches apparent from the face of record that the learned Single Judge refused to exercise the extraordinary jurisdiction vested under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.