Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

M/s. Recon Engicons Private Ltd.,versusThe State of Bihar through the Development Commissioner cum Chairman of State Investment Promotion

Decided
Disposal
D.F.D. FOR NON APPEARANCE

Holding

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

Summary

M/s Recon Engicons Private Ltd. filed a civil writ petition before the Patna High Court against the State of Bihar and various officials of the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority. The petition was listed on several dates but the petitioner failed to appear or present any counsel. The court observed that the petitioner appeared uninterested in prosecuting the case. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition on the ground of non‑prosecution. No substantive merits of the petition were examined.

Issues considered

  • Can a civil writ petition be dismissed for non‑prosecution when the petitioner fails to appear or present counsel?

Subjects

  • civil writ jurisdiction
  • non‑prosecution dismissal
  • Patna High Court
  • procedural default
  • BIADA
  • state of Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3978 of 2024
                                                        In
                                 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1903 of 2024
                 ======================================================
                 M/s. Recon Engicons Private Ltd., having its Registered Office at Sudha
                 Sadan, West of Gandhi Murti, Dujra, P.S. Budha Colony, District Patna
                 having its Unit at Patliputra Industrial Area, District Patna through one of its
                 Director Prabhat Kumar, Male, Aged about 56 years, son of Suryadev Singh,
                 Resident of Sudha Sadan, Budha Colony, Goria Asthan, P.S. Budha Colony,
                 District Patna - 800001.

                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar through the Development Commissioner cum Chairman
                 of State Investment Promotion Board, Government of Bihar, Patna.
           2.    The Additional Chief Secretary, Industries Department cum Chairman and
                 Managing Director, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA)
                 Patna, Bihar
           3.    The Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA) Udyog Bhavan,
                 Gandhi Maidan, Patna through its Chaiman cum Managing Director
           4.    The Additional Chief Secretary cum Managing Director, Bihar Industrial
                 Area Development (BIADA), Udyog Bhavan, Gandhi Maidan, Patna
           5.    The Executive Director, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority
                 (BIADA) Udyog Bhavan, Gandhi Maidan, Patna
           6.    The Deputy General Manager, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority,
                 Patna Cluster, Patna

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     None
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr.Standing Counsel 24
                 For the BIADA                  Mr. Avinash Kumar, Adv.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   07-04-2025                   This matter was called out on 19.03.2025 and also on

                   04.04.2025 but there was no representation on behalf of the

                   petitioner.

                                 2. Even today, when the matter is called, there is no

                   representation on behalf of the petitioner.
             Patna High Court MJC No.3978 of 2024(5) dt.07-04-2025
                                                         2/2




                                    3. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in

                       prosecuting the case.

                                    4. As a result, this MJC is dismissed for non-

                       proseuction.



                                                               (A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Bhardwaj/-

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.