Jharkhand High Court
Dr. Mahendra Prasad Singh & Others vs Chancellor on 10 December, 2020
Author: Deepak Roshan
Bench: Deepak Roshan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C.W.J.C. No. 2189 of 1996(R)
Dr. Mahendra Prasad Singh & others ...... Petitioners
Versus
Chancellor, Birsa Agriculture University, Patna & Ors. ..... Respondents
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajendra Krishna, Advocate For the Respondent-University : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate
-----
12/ 10.12.2020 Heard through V.C.
2. Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that his client has taken the file from his office. Therefore, he is unable to address this Court.
3. The order dated 11.07.2006 reads as follows:
"In course of hearing of this writ application, Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner produced before this Court a copy of the Judgment passed by the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No.397 of 1998 and analogous cases and submitted that the matter in issue in this writ application was same and similar before the Hon'ble Patna High Court and the said Hon'ble Court, vide Judgment dated 18.07.2003 has held that the writ petitioners were entitled to get time bound promotion.
Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the respondent Birsa Agriculture University does not dispute the fact that the matter in issue before this Court as well as before the Hon'ble Patna High Court were same and similar but at the same time, he submits that against said decision of the Hon'ble Patna High Court, a Special Leave Petition has been preferred before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and vide order dated 22.07.2005 the Hon'ble Court has stayed the proceedings for contempt initiated against the respondents which was filed for non implementation of the Judgment of the High Court. A copy of the Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 27.05.2005 has been produced before this Court. Let the Judgment of the Patna High Court dated 18.07.2005 and copy of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 22.07.2005 be kept on record.
In this view of the situation, since the case in issue before this Court is same and similar to those 2 which is pending hearing before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and as such, it is desirable that this application shall away decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 6937, 6933, 6934, 6934, 6935, 6936 and 6938 of 2004.
Accordingly, list this case after disposal of the mater before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 6937, 6933, 6934, 6934, 6935, 6936 and 6938 of 2004. In the mean time, the parties are directed to inform this Court by filing a supplementary affidavit as soon as the matter is decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 6937, 6933, 6934, 6934, 6935, 6936 and 6938 of 2004."
4. From record it appears that no supplementary affidavit has been filed pursuant to the order dated 11.07.2006. However, the case which was pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court has been allowed vide order dated 30.11.2009 in favour of Rajendra Agricultural University. Perhaps, due to the aforesaid order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court which has been decided in favour of respondent-University, the petitioner has lost his interest in this case and has taken back the entire case file from the office of his erstwhile counsel as stated herein above.
5. It further appears that no further vakalatnama has been filed by any other counsel on behalf of the petitioner. Thus it is inferred that the petitioner has lost his interest in this case. As such, the instant application is dismissed for non-prosecution.
6. Let the Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the postal address of the petitioners.
(Deepak Roshan, J.) Pramanik/