IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.660 of 2009 RAM PRAMOD RAI, S/o Late Ram Briksha Rai, R/o Village-Talkhapur Badi Bazar, Dumra, P.S-Sitamarhi, Distt-Sitamarhi……Petitioner/Appellant. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Director(Secondary Education)-Cum-Special Secretary, Bihar Patna. 3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Sitamarhi. 4. The District Education Officer, Sitamarhi. 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Sitamarhi. 6. Bindeshwari Prasad Singh, S/O late Mahadeo Singh, R/O Village-Shauli, P.O+P.S-Belsand, Distt-Sitamarhi. 7. Hari Narayan Singh, S/O Yogendra Prasad Singh, R/O Village-Mohanpur Chowk, P.O+P.S- Sitamarhi, Distt- Sitamarhi. 8. Sita Ram Mandal, S/O Madan Mandal, R/O Village- Morsand (Mananpur), P.S-Runi Saidpur, Distt- Sitamarhi. 9. Ramesh Chandra Singh, S/O Late Ram Bhajan Singh, R/O Village- Rampur Parori, P.S- Sitamarhi, Distt- Sitamarhi……Respondents/Respondents ----------- For the appellant:-Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, Adv For the Respondents:- Mr.Sunil Kumar Ravi, AC to GP-15. ----------- 3. 13-Jul-09 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the prayer of the petitioner for modification or withdrawal of order dated 16th of January, 2009 whereby, upon the submissions of senior counsel appearing for this petitioner the writ petition was permitted to be withdrawn on his behalf so that he may ventilate his grievance before the appropriate authority. It is not in dispute that on 16th of 2 January, 2009 the hearing of the writ petition continued on merits in respect of the other writ petitioners and CWJC. No.8650/1997 was finally disposed of in respect of remaining writ petitioners except this appellant on whose behalf the writ petition was permitted to be withdrawn. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the writ Court should have permitted the modification of order dated 16th January, 2009 to the extent that order related to petitioner no.1, the appellant herein and should have applied the final judgment and order passed in case of other petitioners to the case of this appellant also. It has further been submitted that the writ Court failed to appreciate that the senior counsel appearing for this appellant at the stage of writ petition had prayed for withdrawal of the writ petition without there being any statement to this effect by the appellant- petitioner on affidavit. The last submission must be taken up first. In this Court and in most of the other Courts 3 submission made by the counsels to withdraw a case on behalf of one or more of the petitioners is honoured by the Courts and no affidavit is required from the client. We find this kind of submission to be a game on the part of the appellant which he is trying to play with this Court. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant prays to withdraw this appeal so that as per liberty granted by order dated 16th of January, 2009 this appellant may ventilate his grievance before appropriate authority on all the permissible grounds including the ground that writ petition of others has been allowed. In view of the aforesaid prayer, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ.) (Anjana Prakash,J.)