IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Civil Writ Jurisdiction) W.P. (C) No.5372 of 2015 ---- Steel Authority of India Ltd., a Government of India Company registered under Section 617 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered office at Ispat Bhawan, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, having its unit at Bokaro by the name of Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro Steel City, P.O. + P.S. – Bokaro Steel City, District – Bokaro through N.R. Bajpeyi Son of Late J.N. Bajpeyi Resident of Qr No.600 Sector – IC, B.S. City P.O. + P.S. – Bokaro Steel City Dist Bokaro posted and working as, Senior Manager (Law) SAIL, Bokaro Steel Plant, P.O. + P.S. – Bokaro Steel City, District – Bokaro. …. …. Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi having its office at Project Building, P.O. + P.S. – Dhurwa, Dist.-Ranchi. 2. The Dy Secretary, Engineering, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi having its office at Project Building, P.O. + P.S. – Dhurwa, Dist.-Ranchi. 3. The Chief Engineer, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi having its office at Project Building, P.O. + P.S. – Dhurwa, Dist.-Ranchi. 4. The Chief Engineer, Planning and Monitoring, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi having its office at Project Building, P.O. + P.S. – Dhurwa, Dist.-Ranchi. 5. The Executive Engineer, Tenughat Dam Division, Tenughat, P.O. + P.S. – Tenughat, Distt.-Bokaro. …. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Petitioner(s) : None For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Sushwan Bhowmik, A.C. to S.C.-V ---- 09/Dated: 03rd September, 2024 1. Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondents is present. 2. The last order dated 30.07.2024 reads as under:- “1. Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. However learned counsel for the State is present. Page | 2 W.P. (C) No.5372 of 2015 2. With a view to give one more chance, put up this case on 27.08.2024. 3. It is made clear that if by the next date, nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner to pursue this case, then it may be dismissed for want of prosecution.” 3. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed for want of prosecution. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Amar/- Uploaded