Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ramesh Kumar Vs. the Union of India and ors

Ramesh Kumar vs The Union of India and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 24, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/974290

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Patna High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ramesh Kumar

Respondent

The Union of India and ors

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at patna letters patent appeal no.1719 of 2011 in civil writ jurisdiction case no. 6621 of 2007 with interlocutory application no. 7897 of 2011 in letters patent appeal no. 1719 of 2011 ====================================================== ramesh kumar, s/o late s.d. rai of village- chakakoo, p.o.- satpura, via + p.s.- bhagwanpur, district- vaishali (bihar). .... .... appellant/petitioner versus 1. the union of india through the secretary (a.f.) defence deptt., new delhi 2. the chief engineer (af) pin-900137, c/o 5.apo 3.the chief engineer hq, central command, pin - 900450, c/o 5.apo 4.cwe (af), bamrauli 5. age (1) (a f), bihar .... .... respondents/ respondents ====================================================== appearance : for the appellant/s : mr. anwar karim, advocate. for the respondent/s : mr. binay kumar pandey, c.g.c. ====================================================== coram: honourable the chief justice and honourable mr. justice birendra prasad verma oral order (per: honourable the chief justice”24. 01-2012 learned advocate has failed to amend the cause title pursuant to our order dated 5th january 2012. the cause title submitted by the learned advocate is also not complete. neither the respondents names are entered nor the complete designation or the postal addresses where they can be served. such cause title cannot be said to be complete cause title. for non-compliance of the order dated 5 th january 2012, the appeal and the application stood dismissed for non- prosecution. (r.m. doshit, cj) sujit/- (birendra prasad verma, j.)

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1719 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6621 of 2007 With Interlocutory Application No. 7897 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1719 of 2011 ====================================================== Ramesh Kumar, S/O Late S.D. Rai of Village- Chakakoo, P.O.- Satpura, Via + P.S.- Bhagwanpur, District- Vaishali (Bihar). .... .... Appellant/Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India through the Secretary (A.F.) Defence Deptt., New Delhi 2. The Chief Engineer (AF) Pin-900137, C/O 5.APO 3.The Chief Engineer HQ, Central Command, Pin - 900450, C/O 5.APO 4.CWE (AF), Bamrauli 5. AGE (1) (A F), Bihar .... .... Respondents/ Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Anwar Karim, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Kumar Pandey, C.G.C. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE”

24. 01-2012 Learned advocate has failed to amend the cause title pursuant to our order dated 5th January 2012. The cause title submitted by the learned advocate is also not complete. Neither the respondents names are entered nor the complete designation or the postal addresses where they can be served. Such cause title cannot be said to be complete cause title. For non-compliance of the order dated 5 th January 2012, the Appeal and the application stood dismissed for non- prosecution. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) Sujit/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial