Disposed

Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC2 Nov 2012CWJC/20358/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a memo requiring the petitioner to acquire Class 10 qualification. The court held the petitioner had rushed to court without responding to directions or submitting relevant facts and ruled in his favor with liberty to approach the respondent.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach Respondent No. 3 and place relevant facts and Rules for consideration.

Manoj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

Patna High Court CWJC No.20358 of 2012 (2) dt.02-11-2012

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20358 of 2012

¶3

======================================================

¶4

MANOJ KUMAR, SON OF SAROJ KUMAR SINHA, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA MAHARAJGANJ KURNI TOLA, P.O. GULZARBAGH, P.S.ALAMGANJ, PATNA CITY, DISTRICT PATNA.

¶5

.... .... PETITIONER/S

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF BIHAR

¶8

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA.

¶9

THE JOINT SECRETARY, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. .... .... RESPONDENT/S

¶10

====================================================== Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra Mr.Varun Kumar,

¶12

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, AC to SC 10

¶13

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 02-11-2012 Heard the parties.

¶15

The petitioner has approached this Court against memo No. 12708 dated 12.9.2012 (Annexure-9) issued by Respondent No. 3 requiring the petitioner to acquire qualification of Class 10 pass for his appointment on the post of ‘Group Gh’ (Class IV).

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner invites attention to the relevant Rule 3 of the ‘Bihar Samooh ‘Gh’ (Bharti Evam Seva Shartein) Niyamavali, 2010’ to submit that the minimum qualification for appointment in Class IV post is only Class 8 pass and the petitioner fulfils that requirement being Class 9 pass.

¶17

It appears that the petitioner has rushed to this Court without responding to the aforesaid direction of the Respondent

¶18

Patna High Court CWJC No.20358 of 2012 (2) dt.02-11-2012

¶19

No. 3 and bringing to his notice relevant Rules in this regard.

¶20

In the above view of the matter, therefore, this writ petition is being disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Respondent No. 3 and place the relevant facts and Rules for his consideration and disposal in accordance with law.

¶21

The writ petition stands disposed of.

¶22

(Vikash Jain, J)

¶23

Chandran

Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar 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

Rajendra Kumar Sinha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Umesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rekha Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Alok Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sangeeta Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Karyanand Kumar and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.