2025:JHHC:26163 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 733 of 2024 Kartikesh Shankar, aged about 67 years, Son of:- Late Uma Shankar Verma, Resident of H/o Late Satyadeo Singh, Opposite Annupurna Kutir, Mohalla, Mohanpur, Punaichak, P.O. & P.S.- Shastri Nagar, District-Patna. … … Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Adm. Reforms, P.O.+P.S.- New Delhi, New Delhi. 2. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Project Building, P.O. and P.S.- Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Inspector General, CID, P.O. and P.S.- Dhurwa, District-Ranchi. 4. The Director, State Forensic Science Laboratory, P.O. and P.S.- Hotwar, Ranchi, Jharkhand 5. The Assistant Director, State Forensic Science Laboratory, Rajbanshinagar, P.O. + P.S.+ District-Patna, Bihar. 6. The Inspector General, CID, P.O. + P.S. + District- Patna, Bihar 7. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Home (Police) old Secretariat, Patna, P.O. + P.S. + District- Patna, Bihar 8. The State Advisory Committee, Bihar, Constituted under the provision of Bihar Re-Organization Act, 2000 through the Chairman, Sinchar Bhawan, Bailey Road, P.O. and P.S. Bailey Road, Patna. … … Opp. Parties --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Anuj Kr. Trivedi, Advocate For the State of Bihar : Mr. Ranjit Kumar, AC to GA --- 06/29.08.2025 I.A. No. 8627 of 2025 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the sole petitioner has expired on 08.03.2025 and accordingly, the interlocutory application has been filed seeking substitution. He submits that the petition has been filed by the daughter of the petitioner who may be permitted to pursue the case as the writ petition which has been dismissed inter alia relates to retiral benefits. 2. Considering the submission, the I.A No. 8627 of 2025 is allowed and the daughter of the petitioner namely Kriti Shanker is permitted to pursue the writ petition being the legal representative of the deceased petitioner. 2025:JHHC:26163 2 3. It is made clear that this petition is being allowed only for the present case. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to delete the name of the petitioner and insert the name of the daughter of the petitioner in ‘red ink’ during the course of the day. CMP No. 733 of 2024 5. This CMP has been filed for restoration of W.P.(S) No. 7732 of 2017 which stood dismissed on account of non-compliance of order dated 20.06.2022. The records of the case reveals that a petition for restoration was filed being CMP No. 613 of 2022 which was disposed of vide order dated 27.09.2023 and the time prescribed for removal of defects in the writ petition was extended till 07.11.2023, but the defect in the writ petition was not removed within the extended time and consequently, the order dated 27.09.2023 passed in C.M.P. No. 613 of 2022 has taken its effect. Now, the petitioner has filed another petition for restoration of writ petition. 6. This Court is of the view that another petition for restoration is not maintainable. Accordingly, this CMP is hereby dismissed. 7. It will be open to the petitioner to take steps as may be permissible under law. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Rakesh/-