Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Raj Kishore Prasad Yadav @ Raj Kishore RaiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
WITHDRAWN

Holding

The appeal stands disposed of as withdrawn, with the appellants retaining liberty to approach the competent authority for redress.

Summary

Three individuals filed a writ petition challenging actions of the State of Bihar and its animal husbandry officials, which was dismissed by the Single Judge. They filed an intra‑court appeal under Clause 10 of the Patna High Court Letters Patent Rules. During the hearing, the appellants sought the Court's permission to withdraw the appeal while reserving the right to approach the appropriate authority for relief. The Court granted the request, allowing withdrawal of the appeal and directing that any further grievance be taken to the competent authority. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of as withdrawn, with liberty to approach the authority as deemed appropriate.

Issues considered

  • Whether an intra‑court appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent Rules may be withdrawn by the appellants while preserving the right to approach the competent authority.

Subjects

  • intra‑court appeal
  • withdrawal of appeal
  • Letters Patent Rules
  • competent authority
  • writ jurisdiction
  • procedural law

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   Letters Patent Appeal No.513 of 2023
                                                       In
                               Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11638 of 2021
                 ======================================================
           1.     Raj Kishore Prasad Yadav @ Raj Kishore Rai, S/o Mandev Rai @ Mandeo
                  Prasad Yadav, Resident of Village - Rupchop Durg Motiharian, P.S. -
                  Bishambharpur, District - Gopalganj.
           2.    Ashok Kumar Singh, Son of Singhasan Singh, Resident of Village-
                 Chatursalganj, P.S. - Dumraon, District - Buxar.
           3.    Binod Kumar Sharma, Son of Sri Yogendra Sharma, Resident of Village and
                 Post - Sipahia Kuchaikote, P.S. - Bishambharpur, District - Gopalganj.

                                                                            ... ... Appellant/s
                                                    Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar through the Secretary Animal Husbandry and Fisheries
                 Resources Department, Bihar, Patna.
           2.    The Director, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Resources Department,
                 Bihar, Patna.
           3.    The Regional Director, Veterinary, Saran Range, Chapra.
           4.    District Veterinary Officer, Gopalganj.
           5.    The Dy. Director, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Resources Department,
                 Bihar, Patna.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s    :      Mr.Vijaya Laxmi Srivastwa, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :      Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam (AAG-12)
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
                         and
                         HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

                 (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)

5   06-04-2026                 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                               2. The present intra-court appeal has been preferred

                   under Clause 10 of Letters Patent of Patna High Court Rules,

                   against the order dated 15.09.2022 passed by the learned Single

                   Judge in CWJC No. 11638 of 2021, whereby the writ petition
              Patna High Court L.P.A No.513 of 2023(5) dt.06-04-2026
                                                           2/2




                        filed by the writ petitioners/appellants was dismissed.

                                     3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the

                        appellants seeks permission to withdraw the present appeal,

                        reserving liberty to approach the competent authority for

                        redressal of their grievance.

                                     4. Permission is granted.

                                     5. In case the appellants approach the competent

                        authority, the authority concerned shall look into the matter and

                        pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.

                                     6. Accordingly, the present appeal stands disposed

                        of as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.



                                                     (Sudhir Singh, J)


                                                   ( Shailendra Singh, J)

Rajiv/Sujit

U


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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