IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.960 of 2010 SHASHI BHUSHAN PRASAD, S/O LATE LAXMI NARAIN PRASAD, R/O VILLAGE RAMGAUNA RUPAULI, P.S. PATORY, DISTRICT SAMASTIPUR, (RESPONDENT No. 4 IN THE COURT BELOW) ……………………APPELLANT. Versus 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER, EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY, ZONAL OFFICE, HAZIPUR, BIHAR. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, COMMERCIAL, EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY, SONEPUR, BIHAR. 3. THE ASSISTANAT COMMERCIAL MANAGER, EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY, SONEPUR, BIHAR ….. RESPONDENT 1ST PARTY, 4. YOGENDRA RAI, S/O LATE ANUP LAL RAI, R/O VILLAGE BHANA, P.O.- SHAHPUR, DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR …… PETITIONER IN THE COURT BELOW ………………………….. RESPONDENT 2ND PARTY. ----------- For the Appellant: Mr. Rajiv Kumar Verma, Sr. Advocate. For the Railways: Mr. Sudhir Singh, Advocate. ----------- 3. 28.06.2010. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the Railways. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the writ petitioner had manipulated the service of notice and, in fact, the appellant had no notice although it was accepted to be a valid notice by the writ Court because neither the registered cover nor the A/D card was received back. Since the appellant, prima facie, did not - 2 - appear and contest the writ petition in spite of notice, he should first approach the writ Court with his case that the notice was manipulated. The appellant can take other points also, if he wants the order under appeal to be reviewed. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of. Dilip ( R.M. Doshit, CJ ) ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J )