Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Kunal KushversusThe State of Bihar represented through Mr. Pratyay Amrit, the Chief Secretary, Department of Health

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The MJC is closed as the respondents have complied with the earlier order.

Summary

Petitioner Kunal Kush filed a petition against the State of Bihar and several officials. He sought relief concerning an order previously issued on 10 September 2025 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2322 of 2025. During the pendency of the present Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case (MJC) No. 4292 of 2025, the respondents complied with the earlier order. The court observed that the compliance rendered the MJC redundant. Consequently, the court ordered the MJC to be closed, while leaving the petitioner free to challenge the impugned order if he wishes.

Issues considered

  • Whether the Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case should be closed after the respondents complied with the order dated 10 September 2025 in CWJC No. 2322 of 2025?

Subjects

  • writ jurisdiction
  • miscellaneous jurisdiction
  • order compliance
  • petition closure
  • high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4292 of 2025
                                                      In
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2322 of 2025
                 ======================================================
                 Kunal Kush Son of Shree Kush Prasad Mandal, Resident of Ward No.-15,
                 Gaiyari Yadav Tola, Near Tower, Galgari, P.O. and P.S. Araria, District Araria,
                 Bihar - 854311.

                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar represented through Mr. Pratyay Amrit, the Chief
                 Secretary, Department of Health Bihar.
           2.    Mr. Kumar Ravi, The Secretary, Building Construction Department,
                 Government of Bihar, Patna.
           3.    Mr. Rajesh Kumar, The Engineer in Chief- cum- Additional Commissioner-
                 cum- Special Secretary, Building Construction Department, Government of
                 Bihar, Patna.
           4.    Mr. Ramagya Prasad, The Chief Engineer (North), Building Construction
                 Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
           5.    Mr. Satish Kumar Singh. The Internal Financial Advisor, Building
                 Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
           6.    Mr. Kamlesh Prasad Singh, The Superintending Engineer, Building Circle,
                 Purnea.
           7.    Mr. Shivam Kumar Singh, The Executive Engineer, Building Division,
                 Araria.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr.Bipin Bihari, Adv.
                                                Mr. Md. E. Akthar, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr. Yogendra Pd. Sinha, AAG 7
                                                Mr. Rajeev Kr. Sinha, AC to AAG 7
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   30-01-2026                   Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   submits that during pendency of the present MJC, the authorities

                   have passed the order in compliance of the order dated

                   10.09.2025 passed in CWJC No. 2322 of 2025.

                                 2. Having regard to the same, the present MJC stands
             Patna High Court MJC No.4292 of 2025(2) dt.30-01-2026
                                                         2/2




                       closed leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge impugned

                       order, if he is so advised.



                                                               (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.