Disposed

Dr. Smt. Meera Verma v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC28 Oct 2013CWJC/15936/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ application seeking direction to produce original records to dispute the seniority and appointment of a respondent accused of impersonation. Relying on the Government's assurance to investigate, the Court held the writ infructuous and directed officials to examine records within three months. The petition was declared moot with observations on the dispute. Hearings onl

What did the court decide?

Petitioner informed that grievance redressed; Court held to dispose writ as infructuous but observed that officials must examine original records alleging impersonation within three months.

Dr. Smt. Meera Verma Vs The State Of Bihar and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15936 of 2013

¶2

====================================================== Dr. Smt. Meera Verma Wife Of Dr. Anil Kumar Sinha House No. 59, Road No. 4, Sahi Colony, P.S.- Hajipur Town, District- Vaishali

¶3

.... .... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State Of Bihar Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Health, Bihar, Patna 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Health, Government Of Bihar, Patna 3. Dr. (Smt.) Saroj Singh @ Dr. (Smt.) Saroj Kumari Singh Civil Surgeon-Cum- Chief Medical Officer, Motihari

¶6

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundaram, Adv. For the State : Mr. Ajay, SC-XI For the Respondent/s : Mr. Jitendra Singh, Sr. Adv.

¶7

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶8

5 28-10-2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties as with regard

¶9

to the following reliefs prayed in this writ application:-

¶10

“1(a) For issuance of an appropriate Writ/order/direction for quashing the notification as contained in memo – 3/Misc-01-05/2013-324(3) to 325(3)-Health, Patna dated 06.08.2013 (Annexure-5) issued by the department of Health, Govt. of Bihar, Patna whereby and whereunder Petitioner has been transferred to the post of Addl. Chief Medical Officer, Patna by staying the earlier notification of transfer dated 26.07.2013 till further order.

¶11

b. For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing the transfer order of private Respondent as contained in the aforesaid notification whereby and whereunder the transfer order dated 26.07.2013 of private Respondent from

¶12

Patna High Court CWJC No.15936 of 2013 (5) dt.28-10-2013

¶13

¶14

Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Motihari to Addl. Chief Medical Officer, Patna was stayed with immediate effect till further order.

¶15

For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction commanding the concerned Respondents to act upon the notification dated 26.07.2013 by which the Petitioner has been transferred from Addl. Chief Medical Officer, Darbhanga to Civil Surgeon-cumChief Medical Officer, Motihari.

¶16

¶17

¶18

For a direction upon the concerned Respondents to produce the original records in respect of the private Respondent and further for any other relief/reliefs for which the Petitioner is found entitled too.”

¶19

When the hearing of this case has resumed, today

¶20

Mr. Ajay, learned counsel for the State has produced a copy of the notification dated 8.10.2013, relevant portion whereof reads as follows:-

¶21

^^fcgkj ljdkj LokLF; foHkkx vf/klwpuk

¶22

iVuk] fnukd% 08-10-13 la[;k&3@fofo/k&01&05@2013&413¼3½ LokLF;A

¶23

foHkkxh; vf/klwpuk la0 325¼3½ fnukad 06-08-2013 dks ,rn~ }kjk fujLr djrs gq, foHkkxh; vf/klwpuk la0 301¼3½ fnukad 26-07-2013 ftlds }kjk Mk0 ¼Jherh½ ehjk oekZ dks vlSfud “kY; fpfdRld&lg&eq[; fpfdRlk inkf/kdkjh] eksfrgkjh ds in ij inLFkkfir fd;k x;k Fkk dks dk;kZfUor djus dh Lohd`fr nh tkrh gSA Mk0 ¼Jherh½ ehjk oekZ vxys vkns”k rd vlSfud “kY; fpfdRld&lg&eq[; fpfdRlk inkf/kdkjh] eksfrgkjh ds in ij cuh jgsxhA

¶24

la[;k&3@fofo/k&01&05@2013&414¼3½ LokLF;A foHkkxh; vf/klwpuk la0 324¼3½ fnukad 06-08-2013 dks ,rn~

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.15936 of 2013 (5) dt.28-10-2013

¶26

¶27

}kjk fujLr djrs gq, foHkkxh; vf/klwpuk la0 313¼3½ fnukad 26-07-2013 ftlds }kjk Mk0 ¼Jherh½ ljkst flag dks vij eq[; fpfdRlk inkf/kdkjh iVuk ds in ij inLFkkfir fd;k x;k Fkk dks dk;kZfUor djus dh Lohd`fr nh tkrh gSA Mk0 ¼Jherh½ ljkst flag vxys vkns”k rd vij eq[; fpfdRlk inkf/kdkjh] iVuk ds in ij cuh jgsxhA

¶28

fcgkj jkT;iky ds vkns”k ls g0@& 8-10-13 ¼nsosUnz pkS/kjh½ ljdkj ds voj lfpo Kkikd&3@fofo/k&01&05@2013&413¼3½ ls 414¼3½ Lok0] a iVuk% fnukd 08-10-13** a

¶29

Mr. Ajay has also submitted that as a natural

¶30

corollary of the issuance of aforesaid order dated 8.10.2013, the main grievance of the petitioner stands redressed.

¶31

Mr. Sundaram, learned counsel for the petitioner however seriously objects to the aforesaid submission of Mr. Ajay and submitted that though the transfer notification of the respondent no.3 by which the petitioner was aggrieved has been cancelled but then the fourth prayer in paragraph no. 1(d) of the writ application still survives, inasmuch as, the petitioner had also prayed for production of the original records relating to the respondent no.3 before this Court for an adjudication that she is not Dr. Saroj Singh appointed in the year 1979 on the basis of which the impugned order of transfer came to be passed.

¶32

In the considered opinion of this Court, a declaration of the aforesaid nature as to whether respondent no.3 is one who is

¶33

Patna High Court CWJC No.15936 of 2013 (5) dt.28-10-2013

¶34

¶35

imposter or otherwise cannot be made subject matter of this writ application. It is true that the order of transfer was assailed on the ground Dr. Saroj Singh was another doctor who was appointed in the year 1979 and the respondent no.3 neither could have acquired the seniority of that Dr. Saroj Singh nor could have become Civil Surgeon by borrowing the service history of that Dr. Saroj Singh but then if the transfer notification has itself been cancelled, the grievance of the petitioner gets automatically redressed.

¶36

Mr. Ajay, learned counsel for the State at this stage has submitted that when the aforesaid issue relating to impersonation by respondent no.3 has come to the notice of the State Government, the matter is going to be examined at length so as to rule out the possibility of emergence of the dispute in future as was sought to be raised. He has also assured this Court that the government itself does not want to face the embarrassment on account of the dispute which had surfaced out of the allegation made by the petitioner regarding respondent no.3 being an imposter and continuing on the higher post of Civil Surgeon on the basis of service history of one Dr. Saroj Singh who was appointed in 1979.

¶37

In view of the aforesaid assurance given by Mr. Ajay, all that this Court, while holding the writ application to have

¶38

Patna High Court CWJC No.15936 of 2013 (5) dt.28-10-2013

¶39

¶40

become infructuous, would say that it is always in the interest of the employer to reduce the zone of dispute and specially of a nature in the present case where surprisingly two persons of the same names are also alleged to have involved in exchanging their service history. This Court, therefore, hopes and believes that whatever assurance has been given by Mr. Ajay, learned counsel for the State, will be acted upon by the official respondent nos. 1 & 2 within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order after not only looking into the original records that is available in the office of the State Government but also those which are available with the respondent no.3 which is sought to be brought on record by filing a fresh supplementary counter affidavit by the respondent no.3 before this Court today.

¶41

It, however, goes without saying that as the petitioner has brought this aspect before this Court, she too will be at liberty to bring any fact to the notice of the State Government in resolving the aforesaid dispute as with regard to her allegation of the respondent no.3 being an imposter claiming seniority of another Dr. Saroj Singh who was appointed in the year 1979.

¶42

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of.

¶43

Patna High Court CWJC No.15936 of 2013 (5) dt.28-10-2013

¶44

¶45

Let a copy of this order be given to Mr. Ajay, SC-

¶46

XI, learned counsel for the State for its strict compliance.

¶47

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J)

¶48

Rishi/-

Dr. Smt. Meera Verma v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Smt. Meera Verma 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

Dr. Jitendra Kumar and Anr. Vs Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University and Ors.

Dr. Seema Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Veer Prakash Pd. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Uttam Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sarita Kumari and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.