Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Shiv Prasad SharmaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
WITHDRAWN

Holding

The petition was dismissed as withdrawn because the petitioner had died.

Summary

Shiv Prasad Sharma filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Development) to dispose of an objection dated 06.01.2026, which would allow his saw‑mill to be placed in the Final Seniority List for a license under the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 and the Bihar Wood‑Based Industries (Establishment & Regulation) Act, 2025. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner informed the court that the petitioner had died and requested that the petition be withdrawn. The court accepted the request and dismissed the petition as withdrawn, without addressing the merits of the mandamus claim. The dismissal effectively ends the proceedings.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition can be withdrawn on account of the death of the petitioner
  • Whether the court should entertain a mandamus application for inclusion in the seniority list

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • mandamus
  • seniority list
  • license
  • death of petitioner
  • withdrawal of petition

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1521 of 2026
                 ======================================================
                 Shiv Prasad Sharma Son of Sri Bhola Mistri Resident of Village- Tehta, P.S.-
                 Tehta, District- Jehanabad (Bihar).

                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Environment and Forest
                 Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
           2.    The State Level Committee For Wood Based Industries, Bihar, Patna.
           3.    The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Development), Bihar.
           4.    The Licensing Officer- Cum- Divisional Forest Officer, Gaya Forest
                 Division, Gaya.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :         Mr. Vinay Mistry, Adv.
                 For the Respondent/s   :         Mr. Standing Counsel 10
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-04-2026                    Heard Mr. Vinay Mistry, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and the State.

                               2. The present application has been preferred for the

                   following relief(s):

                                                       (i) For issuance of a writ in the
                                            nature of mandamus directing the Principal
                                            Chief Conservator of Forest (Development)
                                            Bihar (Respondent No. 3) to dispose of the
                                            objection dated 06.01.2026 (Annexure-P-3)
                                            filed by the petitioner to include his saw mill
                                            in the Final Seniority List so that the
                                            "Application of License dated 12.05.2000"
                                            be considered for grant of license under the
                                            Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 read
           Patna High Court CWJC No.1521 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                                            with       Bihar        Wood-Based    Industries
                                            (Establishment & Regulation) Act, 2025.
                                                         (ii) For issuance of other writ (s),
                                            order(s), direction(s) as your Lordships may
                                            deem fit and proper in the facts and
                                            circumstances of the case.
                                 3. Learned counsel, at the outset, submits that the sole

                     petitioner is no more and as such, he may be permitted to

                     withdraw the petition.

                                 4. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as withdrawn.



                                                   (Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.