Dismissed

Sri Deo Narayan Upadhaya v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC30 Jul 2012CWJC/2030/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil Writ petition challenging a Tribunal order regarding age eligibility for teacher appointment was dismissed. The Court upheld the lower Tribunal's finding that the appeal was barred by delay and expressed serious reservations about the petitioner's lack of locus standi, declining to examine the merits of the age criterion controversy.

What did the court decide?

The writ application is dismissed.

Sri Deo Narayan Upadhaya Vs the State of Bihar… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2030 of 2011

¶2

====================================================== 1. Sri Deo Narayan Upadhaya S/O Late Raghubansh Singh R/O Vill.- Poari, P.S.- Harnaut, Distt.- Nalanda .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Human Resources, Development Department Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority Nalanda Through Its Member 3. The District Magistrate, Nalanda 4. The District Superintendent Of Education, Nalanda 5. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Poari, Distt.- Nalanda 6. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Poari Distt.- Nalanda 7. Sri Manoranjan Kumar S/O Late Ram Chavita Singh R/O Vill.- Poari, P.S.- Harnaut, Distt.- Nalanda .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Siddharth Shankar Pandey, AC to GP-24 For Respondent nos. 5 and 6: Mr. Madan Kumar, Adv For Respondent no. 7 :- Mr. Pushkar Narain Shahi, Senior Adv. Mr. Sanjeet Kumar Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶3

5 30-07-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 20.10.2010 passed in Appeal Case No. 82 of 2010 by the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal, Nalanda at Biharsharif.

¶4

Patna High Court CWJC No.2030 of 2011 (5) dt.30-07-2012

¶5

2 / 3

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if the Advertisement had been issued in 2004 and the relevant date for determination of age be 1.1.2004, but if appointments came to be made for any reason in 2005, the relevant date for determining the age should be 1.1.2005 and not 1.1.2004. If that be so, respondent no. 7 was clearly above 30 years of age and ineligible to be considered under the Rules.

¶7

Counsel for the State has submitted that the Tribunal has arrived at a finding of fact that the appointment was in pursuance of an Advertisement published in 2004. If in any reason the process of appointment got delayed attributable to any orders of the Court it cannot shift the eligibility criteria to any subsequent year. It is next submitted that the petitioner was not even a candidate in competition with respondent no. 7 and the writ petition at his behest is not maintainable.

¶8

Respondent no. 7 was appointed as a Shiksha Mitra in the year 2005. The appointment appears to have been renewed on more than one occasion leading to his acquiring the status of a Panchayat Shikshak. The petitioner does not seem to have questioned his appointment at any stage till he filed the present appeal before the Tribunal which was held to be grossly barred by

¶9

Patna High Court CWJC No.2030 of 2011 (5) dt.30-07-2012

¶10

3 / 3

¶11

delay.

¶12

The Court does not consider it necessary to go into the merits of the controversy. Keeping in mind that the petitioner was not an applicant himself, the Court has serious reservation about his locus. If the Tribunal has arrived at a considered and reasoned order that the Appeal itself was highly belated, the Court finds no reason to take any different view of the matter.

¶13

The writ application is dismissed.

¶14

P. Kumar/- (Navin Sinha, J)

Sri Deo Narayan Upadhaya v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Deo Narayan Upadhaya 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chhotu Poddar @ Kamal Kumar and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar

Prof.Khalid Mirza Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Anand Narain Roy Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shyam Sunder Prasad and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Parmila Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dr. Prem Prakash Gupta Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.