Dismissed

Nawnit Kumar Dwivedi v. District Administration

Jharkhand HC5 Jan 2015WPC/5931/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought appointment claiming entitlement based on grandfather's gift of land to the Governor. Court dismissed petition for lack of statutory scheme and contradictory pleadings regarding land status.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed due to absence of any government scheme for appointment and contradictory averments by the petitioner regarding land status.

Nawnit Kumar Dwivedi Vs District Administration — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 5931 of 2012

Nawnit Kumar Dwivedi

... … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa

¶8

District Education Officer, Garhwa

¶9

Block Development Officer, Kharaundhi, Bhawnathpur, Garhwa ... … Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

¶11

For the Petitioner : Mr. Awadhesh Pathak, Advocate Mr. Devesh Krishna, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Manoj Kumar, S.C. (Mines) Mr. Ashutosh Kr. Singh,J.C. to S.C.(Mines)

¶12

06/05.01.2015 Seeking a direction upon the respondents for providing appointment, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. The petitioner has based his claim stating that his grand-father gifted land comprised in Khata No. 203, Plot No. 16B/4 to the Governor. The petitioner had earlier approached this court in W.P.(S) No. 4519 of 2011 which was dismissed vide order dated 21.09.2011.

¶13

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition is not barred by res-judicata in as much as, the writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 4519 of 2011 was dismissed for the reason that at that time the petitioner was not in possession of the documents to establish that the land belonging to the petitioner's family was gifted by his grand-father to the then Governor. Referring to communication dated 12.03.2008, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a matter of record that the land comprised in Khata No. 203, Plot No. 16B/4 at village-Amrora, totalling an area of 5.81 acres belonged to the family of the petitioner and therefore, the

¶14

¶15

petitioner is entitled for consideration of his claim for appointment.

¶16

3. Mr. Manoj Kumar, the learned S.C. (Mines) appearing for the State of Jharkhand opposes the prayer of the petitioner and states that there is no scheme formulated by the Government under which appointment can be offered to the petitioner who claims himself to be the grand-son of a person who allegedly gifted land to the Governor.

¶17

4. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed. The petitioner has not produced or even averred in the writ petition that there is any scheme under which the petitioner is entitled for appointment. In the counter-affidavit, the respondents have specifically pleaded that the land in question was recorded in khatian as Kism Jungle Sakhuwa. A recommendation was made by the Sub-Divisional Officer vide communication dated 12.03.2008 that the land in question can be utilised for construction of school. From communication dated 1203.2008, it appears that the petitioner has taken contradictory plea at different stages. Moreover, since there is no scheme for providing appointment, I find no merit and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶18

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

¶19

Manish

Nawnit Kumar Dwivedi v. District Administration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nawnit Kumar Dwivedi v. District Administration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ms Triveni Engicons Pvt. Ltd. through One of Its Director Govind Pd Agrawal Vs Rural Works Department

City Square Project Pvt. Ltd. through Its Managing Director Kishor Kumar Mehta and Anr. Vs Land Reforms And Revenue Department

Marshal Topno Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Parwati Devi Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Zaidul Haque Vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Mahavir Dangi and Ors. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.