IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Review No 120 of 2011 Sunil Kumar, son of late Binod Bihari Sinha, resident of Flat No 402/A, Mahalaxmi Apartments, East Boring Canal Road, Patna – 800 001, P O – GPO, P S – Buddha Colony, District – Patna, the then District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Patna and at present posted as District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Araria - Petitioner -Versus- 1 The State of Bihar 2 The Secretary, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3 The Deputy Secretary, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 4 The Director of Fisheries, Bihar, Patna 5 Subodh Kumar Srivastava, son of Sri Ramesh Chandra Srivastava, resident of Bengali Tola, PO and PS – Laheriasarai, District - Darbhanga, the then District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Katihar and at present Deputy Director (HQ), Directorate of Fisheries, Bihar, Patna 6 Bijendra Kishore Das, son of late Jaideo Das, resident of Road No 2 (Ext), Rajbanshi Nagar, PO and PS – Shastri Nagar, Patna, the then Assistant Fisheries Director (Research), Fisheries Research Centre, Mithapur Farm, Patna and at present Deputy Director (Statistics and Marketing), Directorate of Fisheries, Bihar, Patna 7 Dilip Kumar Singh, son of Sri Siya Prasad Singh, resident of village – Rajwara, P O – Inai, P S – Baheri, District – Darbhanga, the then District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Nalanda and at present District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Khagaria 8 Gauri Shankar, son of Sri Ram Das Shah, resident of village – Singhiya, P S – Jamalpur, District – Munger, the then District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Begusarai and at present District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Madhubani 9 Devendra Naik, son of Sri Kishori Nayak, resident of village – Sahar Ghat, PO and PS – Sahar Ghat, District – Madhubani, the then District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Saharsa and at present District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Katihar 10 Subodh Kumar, son of Sri Ram Ratan Singh, resident of Purnendu Nagar, Khoja Imli, PO and PS – Biharsharif, District – Patna, then then District Fisheries Officer –cum Chief Executive Officer, Siwan 11 Suman Kumar, son of Krishnadeo Thakur, resident of At and PO – Kamtaul, PS – Kamtaul, District – Darbhanga, the then District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Araria and at present Assistant Director (Planning), Directorate of Fisheries, Bihar, Patna 12 Jai Prakash, son of Ram Prasad Choudhary, resident of Mohalla – Ghagha Ghat, P O – Mahendru, P S – Sultanganj, District – Patna, the then District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Hajipur (Vaishali) 13 Shailendra Kumar, son of Ram Swarup Choudhary, resident of Mohalla – Ghagha Ghat, P O – Mahendru, P S – Sultanganj, District – Patna, the then District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Ara (Bhojpur) -Respondents 14 Vinod Kumar, son of Ram Bahadur Mahto, resident of village – Palta, P O – Amari, P S – Khodabandpur, District – Begusarai, at present posted as District Fisheries Officer –cum- Chief Executive Officer, Buxar 2 -Respondent/Writ Petitioner *** 3 06.07.2011 This review application has been filed by one Sunil Kumar, District Fisheries Officer –cum- Cdhief Executive Officer, Patna. His grievance is that this Court disposed of CWJC No 6492 of 2007 by order dated 29.11.2010 allowing the writ application by the order as passed by the Court. The review petitioner submits that he is seriously prejudiced as his seniority over the writ petitioner has been altered as a consequence by order of this Court. He points out that the review petitioner was made respondent No 7 in the writ application. There were ten private respondents being respondents No 5 to 14. This Court did not issue notice to any of the private respondents but private respondents No 8, 9 and 10 of the writ petition appeared suo motu and filed a counter affidavit. This Court lost sight of the fact that the counter affidavit was only by the three private respondents and not by other and proceeded to decide the matter. The review petitioner submits that as per petitioner’s own pleadings in the writ petition and his own petitions before the authorities, he had claimed no seniority over private respondents No 5, 6 and 7. He had in fact claimed seniority over the rest of the respondents but without the review petitioner’s appearance, this fact could not be pointed out and, as such a general order was issued by this Court under a misapprehension of fact that the private respondents were all represented. Having perused the records, I find that the contention of the review petitioner is correct. He was neither noticed by this Court nor for that matter any of the private respondents were noticed by this Court and none of the private respondents, except respondents No 8, 9 and 10, 3 appeared. As such, the case was decided in their absence and to their prejudice. I find that this was an inadvertent procedural error by this Court warranting interference in this review petition. As the order was passed without hearing the party being adversely affected, the order, as passed by this Court on 29.11.2010 in CWJC No 6492 of 2007, is recalled. The review application is, thus, disposed of. List CWJC No 6492 of 2007 For Admission before appropriate Bench after obtaining orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)