Disposed

Pushpa Kumari and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC13 Aug 2012CWJC/13756/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Oral order holding that the cause of action for non-appointment as Shiksha Mitra ended when the post was abolished and converted to Panchayat Shikshak. Rights to claim equitable absorption accrued only to those holding the post on the conversion date. Delay objections left open for the Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Application stands disposed. Issues regarding delay left open for consideration by the Tribunal if applied before it.

Pushpa Kumari and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

Patna High Court CWJC No.13756 of 2012 (2) dt.13-08-2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13756 of 2012

¶4

====================================================== 1. Pushpa Kumari W/O Ajai Kumar Singh R/O Village- Rajpur, Police Station- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur

¶5

Nishant Kumar S/O Sheo Kumar Tiwary R/O Village- Rajpur, Police Station- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur

¶6

Anil Kumar Tiwary S/O Late Awadhesh Tiwary R/O Village- Rajpur, Police Station- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur

¶7

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Government Of Bihar, New Secretariat Building, Patna

¶8

The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Government Of Bihar, New Secretariat Building, Patna

¶9

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur

¶10

The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur

¶11

The Block Development Officer Motipur Block, District- Muzaffarpur 6. The Block Education Extension Officer Block Motipur, DistrictMuzaffarpur

¶12

The Mukhia Manguraha Grampanchayat, Tajpur, Block- Motipur, District- Muzaffarpur

¶13

The Panchayat Secretary Manuraha Grampanchayat, Tajpur, Block Motipur, District- Muzaffarpur

¶14

Shahana Bushra D/O Md. Karimullah R/O Vill.- Chakwa, P.O.- Birhima Bazar, P.S.- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur 10. Ajay Kumar Singh S/O Sachidanand Singh R/O Vill.- Baburban, P.S.Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur

¶15

Md. Kamaluddin S/O Md. Maqsood R/O Vill.- Chakwa, P.S.- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur 12. Chandradeo Ram S/O Shri Ram Dhari Ram R/O Vill.- Chakwa, P.S.Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur

¶16

.... .... Respondent/s

¶17

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Bihari Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.P. Gupta SC-16 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶18

2 13-08-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶19

The petitioners questions appointment of the

¶20

private respondents as Shiksha Mitra in the year 2003/2005

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.13756 of 2012 (2) dt.13-08-2012

¶22

¶23

leading to their absorption as Panchayat Shikshak on 01.07.2006. The petitioner was an unsuccessful applicant for the post of Shiksha Mitra.

¶24

In so far as the candidature of the petitioner for appointment is concerned, once the post of Shiksha Mitra stood abolished on 01.07.2006, any alleged wrong done to him became infructuous as a cause of action personal to him. Only such Panchayat Shikshak who held the post of Shiksha Mitra on 01.07.2006 acquired the status of Panchayat Shikshak. Thereafter the eligibility, modality and requirements for appointment, all changed. The cause of action of the petitioner therefore ended on 01.07.2006. The view finds support in C.W.J.C. No. 4332 of 2007 affirmed in L.P.A. No. 393 of 2008.

¶25

Having said so, it is an entirely different, if a person allegedly obtained employment as a Shiksha Mitra on fake qualifications leading to acquisition of status as Panchayat Shikshak. Fraud may unravel everything. This cannot be construed as any opinion and or observation on the merits of the matter. It is the case of the petitioner that the private respondents obtained employment as Shiksha Mitra by practicing fraud. Whether fraud was practiced or not is a question of fact to be determined by the Tribunal.

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.13756 of 2012 (2) dt.13-08-2012

¶27

¶28

Prima facie, the petitioner does not appear to have raised objection within time under Rule-18 or even before the Tribunal thereafter pursuant to its creation. Issues for delay are therefore left open for consideration by the Tribunal, as presently discussed, if the petitioner files such application before it.

¶29

The application stands disposed.

¶30

(Navin Sinha, J.)

¶31

Md. Ibrarul/-

Pushpa Kumari and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpa Kumari and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

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

Dr.Ashok Daulatram Bhagat Sing Vs the Vice Chancellor,Lalit Nara

Dr.Ashok Kumar Singh Vs Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar Univer

Sobhakant Lal Das Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Rajiva Ranjan Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Anil Kumar Jha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ashok Kumar Dewedi Vs The State Of Bihar And Others