IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10423 of 2006 ====================================================== Ragho Mistry @ Raghav Mistry .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar Mr. Bhaskar Shankar Mr. Rakesh Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. O.P.Upadhya (Sc(C)2) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 6 27-01-2017 Perused the office report. It would appear that on 18.01.2017, I.A. No. 6270 of 2013 was taken up for hearing and after having heard the parties, the name of deceased-respondent no. 7 was ordered to be expunged and in his place his legal heirs, whose name was given at para-3 of the aforesaid interlocutory application, was ordered to be substituted but due to typing error, in place of para-3 of I.A. No. 6270 of 2013, it was inadvertently been typed as para-2 of I.A. No. 6270 of 2013. Accordingly, in para-2 and 4 of order dated 18.01.2017 in place of para-2 of I.A. No. 6270 of 2013, it be read as para-3 of I.A. No. 6270 of 2013 and in para-4 of order dated 18.01.2017 after the word “is” and before the word “allowed”, the word Patna High Court CWJC No.10423 of 2006 (6) dt.27-01-2017 2/3 ”partly” be added. The legal heirs of respondent no. 7 have not appeared as yet but at the time of passing order dated 18.01.2017, it was pointed out that the legal heirs of respondent no. 7 have already appeared though their learned Advocates and that was the reason the aforesaid fact came at para 3 of the order dated 18.01.2017. Therefore, the para 3 of order dated 18.01.2017 shall be deemed to be deleted from the aforesaid order. Issue notices to proposed legal heirs of deceased- respondent no. 7, whose names have been mentioned at para-3 of I.A. No. 6270 of 2013 by both process that is under registered cover with A/D as well as ordinary post for which requisites etc. must be filed within a week from today, failing which the matter shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench as against proposed legal heirs of respondent no. 7. So far as death of sole petitioner, Ragho Mistry @ Raghav Mistry is concerned, learned counsel appearing for respondents no. 5 and 6 submits that as per his information, sole petitioner, Ragho Mistry @ Raghav Mistry is alive and accordingly, he seeks sometime to verify the aforesaid fact. I.A. No. 6270 of 2013 has been filed by the sons of sole petitioner, Ragho Mistry @ Raghav Mistry and they have Patna High Court CWJC No.10423 of 2006 (6) dt.27-01-2017 3/3 specifically pleaded at para-2 of aforesaid interlocutory application that Ragho Mistry @ Raghav Mistry died on 10.10.2011 leaving behind them as his legal heirs. Moreover, if the respondents no. 5 and 6 have any objection regarding the death of sole petitioner, Ragho Mistry @ Raghav Mistry, they may file their objection within a week from today, failing which the office shall expunge the name of sole petitioner, Ragho Mistry @ Raghav Mistry from the original petition and in his place, his proposed legal heirs, whose names have been given at para 2 of I.A. No. 6270 of 2013, shall be substituted. List this matter after service report or after appearance of proposed legal heirs of respondent no. 7, whichever is earlier. List this matter after one week under appropriate heading. SHAHZAD/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) U