IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 70 of 2024 1. Ramjee Singh, aged about 75 years, S/o late Chandrama Singh, R/o Sector-3E, D-Type, Q. No. 364, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … (Petitioner No. 1) 2.Arun Kumar Rai, aged about 76 years, S/o late Kanhaiya Rai, R/o Sector-3C, E-Type, Q. No. 739, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … (Petitioner No. 4) 3. Nilofar Naheed @ N Nahid, aged about 55 years, W/o late Md. Matin Hussain, R/o Sector-3D, D-Type, Q. No. 166, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. 4. Shankar Prasad Singh, aged about 75 years, S/o late Baburam Singh, R/o Sector-3D, D-Type, Q. No. 207, Ρ.Ο. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … (Petitioner No. 7) 5. Lalan Jha, aged about 72 years, S/o late Braj Kishore Jha, R/o Sector-3E, D-Type, Q. No. 271, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … (Petitioner No. 8) 6. Arun Kumar Srivastava, aged about 75 years, S/o late Anand Swarup Srivastava, R/o Sector 3D, D-Type, Q. No. 538, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … (Petitioner No. 9) 7. Maya Devi, aged about 71 years, W/o late R. N. Prasad, R/o Sector-3E, D-Type, Q. No. 483, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … (Petitioner No. 10) 8. Tetri Devi, aged about 70 years, W/o late Durga Prasad Ray, R/o Sector-12A, D-Type, Q. No. 1398, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … (Petitioner No. 11) … … Petitioners/Petitioners Versus 1. Bokaro Steel City through its Managing Director-cum- Chairman having its registered office at Ispat Bhawan, B.S. City, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. 2. Executive Director (P&A), Bokaro Steel Plant, Ispat Bhawan, B.S. City, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. 3. General Manager (Town Administration), Bokaro Steel Plant, Ispat Bhawan, B.S. City, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. 4. Assistant Manager (Land and Estate Department), Bokaro Steel Limited, Ispat Bhawan, B.S. City, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. 5. Estate Officer, Bokaro Steel Plant, Ispat Bhawan, B.S. City, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … Respondents/Respondents/OPs 6. Avinash Chandra Kumar, S/o late Devendra Kumar, R/o Sector-3A, E-Type, Q. No. 669, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner No.2/Proforma Respondent 2 7. Durgawati Singh, W/o late Shyam Narayan Singh, R/o Sector-3D, Q. No. 439, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner No. 3/Proforma Respondent 8. Balmiki Sharma, S/o late Banke Bihari Sharma, R/o Sector- 4A, D- Type, Q. No. 2256, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner No.6/Proforma Respondent … … Proforma Opp. Parties --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Baibhaw Gahlaut, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Ms. Puja Agrawal, Advocate --- 04/03.01.2025 Learned counsel for the parties are present. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this civil miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking restoration of W.P.(S) No. 2951 of 2019 which stood dismissed on account of non-removal of defects in terms of order dated 25.04.2022. The learned counsel submits that there were number of petitioners in the said writ petition, but only some of the petitioners have approached this Court who were petitioner nos. 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 in the writ petition. He further submits that the writ petitioner no. 5 has been represented by present petitioner no. 3 in this petition seeking restoration of the writ petition who is the wife of the deceased writ petitioner no. 5. He has submitted that appropriate steps will be taken in the writ petition in connection with writ petitioner no. 5 namely Md. Matin Hussain who has now expired and is being represented by petitioner no. 3 in the present case. 3. He submits the remaining writ petitioners i.e. writ petitioner nos. 2, 3 and 6 have been made proforma opposite parties. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the then counsel of the writ petitioners did not remove the defects and did not inform the petitioners about the time granted by this Court for removal of defects. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties has no serious objection to the prayer for restoration. She submits that the writ petition be restored only in connection with the petitioners in the present case. 3 6. Considering the aforesaid submissions, the writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 2951 of 2019 is restored to its original file to the extent it relates to the petitioner nos. 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. The writ petition is also restored to the extent it relates to writ petitioner no. 5 namely Md. Matin Hussain with liberty to the present petitioner no.3 ( wife of deceased writ petitioner no.5) to file appropriate petition for substitution of the deceased petitioner no.5 in the writ records. 7. It is made clear that the writ petitioner nos. 2, 3 and 6 have not filed the present petition and therefore, the writ petition continues to be dismissed with respect to the writ petitioner nos. 2, 3 and 6. 8. This civil miscellaneous petition is accordingly disposed of. 9. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Pankaj