PRABHAT KUMAR KANODIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE prayer in this writ application by the writ petitioner as mentioned in paragraphs no. 1, 2, 3 reads as follows: -

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner, however submits that one interlocutory application being I.A. No. 223 of 2007 has been filed by the two purchasers who according to him have come into the shoes of the writ petitioner and therefore, they may be substituted and transposed as writ petitioners.