Patna High Court
MJC/5314/2019 of Raja Ramchandra Institute Of Technology and Management, Vs The State of Bihar on 19 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5314 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1875 of 2015 ====================================================== Raja Ramchandra Institute of Technology and Management, Pisawa Road, Chandaus, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh through its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5314 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1875 of 2015
======================================================
Raja Ramchandra Institute of Technology and Management, Pisawa Road, Chandaus, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh through its Acting Director, Lalit, Aged about 39 years, Gender-Male, Son of Premvir Singh, Resident of Nayaganj-1, Khurja Nagar, District-Aligarh, U.P.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar.
2.
Shre Prem Singh Meena, name of the father is not known to the petitioner, Secretary, Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.
3.
Sri Mithilesh Kumar, (Name of the father is not known to the petitioner), Director, Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner
:
Mr. Aditya Dev, Advocate
For the State
:
Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha, G.A.7
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
4 19-08-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. Shri Aditya Dev, the learned Advocate appears and submits that on the instruction given by the learned Advocate on record namely Shri Sanjeet Kumar, he be permitted to withdraw the present contempt petition.
3. Permission, so sought for, is accorded.
4. The contempt petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
Sanjay/- (Ritesh Kumar, J.) U