Remanded

Dev Kumar Prasad and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC8 Feb 2013CWJC/402/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an Appellate Tribunal order cancelling their appointment as Panchayat Teachers on the grounds of illegality and lack of hearing. The court held the Tribunal failed to grant an opportunity of hearing and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

What did the court decide?

The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration after affording a hearing to the petitioners.

Dev Kumar Prasad and Ors. Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.402 of 2011

¶3

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

¶4

Dev Kumar Prasad son of Mumi Mahto, Resident of Village- Chuavar, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya.

¶5

Rajendra Rajan son of Sidheshwar Singh, Resident of Village- Manaivi, P.S. Wazirganj, District- Gaya.

¶6

Hema Shankar, Daughter of Ashok Kumar Singh, Resident of Village Manaini, P.S. Wazirganj, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶7

The State Of Bihar

¶8

Appellate Authority through its Secretary, Gaya.

¶9

The District Magistrate, Gaya

¶10

Nilesh Kumar Sinha, son of Bhubneshwar Prasad, Resident of VillageBahera, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya.

¶11

Punam Kumari W/o Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Resident of Village- Bahera, P.S. Imamganj, District- Gaya.

¶12

.... .... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Parmeshwar Vishwakarma, AC to SC 27

¶14

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶15

3 08-02-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶16

State.

¶17

The petitioners were appointed in the year 2007 as Panchayat Teachers in different schools under Chuavar Panchayat in the district of Gaya.

¶18

The petitioners submit that the Appellate Tribunal cancelled the entire selection process on the ground of illegality and irregularity.

¶19

The grievance of the petitioners is that the impugned

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.402 of 2011 (3) dt.08-02-2013

¶21

2 / 2

¶22

order cancelling the entire selection process including the appointment has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing.

¶23

In my view, the Tribunal ought to have given a hearing to the petitioners before cancelling the entire selection process as well as their appointments. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. The impugned order passed by the Tribunal would remain in abeyance without giving any right of reinstatement, which would be subject to adjudication thereof.

¶24

This application stands disposed of.

¶25

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J)

¶26

Uday/-

Dev Kumar Prasad and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dev Kumar Prasad 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Kumar Pandey Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Avinash Kumar And Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Raja Ram Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Md.Shamser Alam and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Dr.Srinivas Sharma Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Kumari Sima Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.