Patna High Court

Sharmila KumariversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors

Decided: 31 January 2026
Disposal: D.F.D. FOR NON APPEARANCE
Bench: ALOK KUMAR SINHA

Holding

The petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution due to the petitioner’s failure to appear and pursue the writ.

Summary

Sharmila Kumari filed a civil writ petition in the Patna High Court challenging actions of the State of Bihar and various officials under the Bihar Public Grievance Redressal Act. The petition was originally filed in 2017 and remained pending for several years. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner at the hearing on 31-01-2026, and the petitioner seemed uninterested in pursuing the writ. The court noted a prior order dated 20-11-2025 that had adjourned the matter as a last chance. Considering the lapse of time, the lack of representation, and the apparent disinterest of the petitioner, the court dismissed the petition for non‑prosecution.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate course of action when a petitioner fails to appear or prosecute a pending writ petition?

Subjects

civil writ jurisdiction
non‑prosecution
petition dismissal
public grievance redressal
court procedure

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12014 of 2017
                 ======================================================
                 Sharmila Kumari wife of Sachidanand Singh resident of village Pandey
                 Bigha, Post Office - Sargawan, Police Station - Deo, District Aurangabad.
                                                                              … … Petioner

                                                     Versus

           1.    The State Of Bihar
           2.    The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar,
                 Patna.
           3.    The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
           4.    The State Appellate Authority under Bihar Public Grievance Redressal Act,
                 Patna.
           5.    The Appellate Authority under Bihar Public Grievance Redressal act-cum-
                 Commissioner, Gaya Division.
           6.    The District Magistrate, Aurangabad.
           7.    The District Education Officer, Aurangabad.
           8.    The Public Grievance Redressal Officer, Aurangabad.
           9.    The Sub Divisional Officer, Aurangabad, District - Aurangabad.
           10. The Block Development Officer, Block Deo, Aurangabad.
           11. The Block Education Officer, Deo, Aurangabad.
           12. The President, Panchayat Teachers Recruitment Committee cum Mukhia,
               Saragawan Panchayat, Block Deo,
           13. The Secretary, Panchayat Teachers Recruitment Committee-cum-Panchayat
               Sevak, Sargawan Panchayat, Bl

                                                           ... ... Respondents
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner      :      None
                 For the Respondent      :      Smt. Shilpa Singh, Ga-12
                                         :      Mr. Apurva Kumar, AC to GA-12
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   31-01-2026                        No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.

                               2. Learned counsel for the Respondent-State is

                   present.

                               3. By previous order dated 20.11.2025, this case was
          Patna High Court CWJC No.12014 of 2017(5) dt.31-01-2026
                                                     2/2




                    adjourned by way of last chance. This case is of the year 2017

                    and, therefore, no purpose would be served in protracting the

                    litigation in absence of the learned counsel for the petitioner

                    who does not seem to be interested in pressing the writ

                    application.

                                4. Hence, the case is dismissed for non-prosecution.



                                            (Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…