Disposed

Madhukar Lal Karn v. The Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.

Patna HC12 Apr 2013CWJC/6216/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition regarding service regularization and promotion was filed. The Court did not grant the reliefs sought directly but granted liberty to the petitioner to file a representation, directing the respondent to decide within six months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to file a representation; respondent directed to consider representation within six months.

Madhukar Lal Karn Vs The Bihar State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6216 of 2013

¶3

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

¶4

Madhukar Lal Karn Son Of Late Jagdish Narayan Lal Resident of Village and Post - Raghopur Balat, P.S. - Raj Nagar, District - Madhubani, Presently Posted as Steno FC-II (Sri Vijay Kumar) Cell, Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd., Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶6

The Bihar State Electricity Board, now Known as Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd. through its Chairman - Cum- Managing Director, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

¶7

The Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd., Vidyut Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna

¶8

The Member (Finance And Revenue), Bihar State Electricity Board now Known as the Director (Finance), Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd., Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

¶9

The Secretary, Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd, Vidyut Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna

¶10

The Joint Secretary, Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd., Vidyut Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna

¶11

The Under Secretary, Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd. Vidyut Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna

¶12

The General Manager-Cum-Chief Engineer, Tirhut Electricity Supply Area, Muzaffarpur

¶13

The Electric Superintending Engineer, Chapra Electric Circle, Chapra .... .... Respondent/s

¶14

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nityanand Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh Mr. Akhileshwar Singh

¶15

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶16

2 12-04-2013 Heard.

¶17

The petitioner, claiming to be still posted and working as Steno under the respondent Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd., Patna, has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the reliefs enumerated in paragraph-1 of the writ petition, which reads as follows:

¶18

“1. That by way of instant writ application, the petitioner prays inter-alia the following reliefs:(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/ directions in the nature of

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.6216 of 2013 (2) dt.12-04-2013

¶20

2/3

¶21

mandamus commanding and directing the respondents either regularize the service of the petitioner in Stenographer Grade-I or to promote the petitioner from Stenographer grade-II to Stenographer Grade-I, as he has been officiating as Stenographer Grade-I since June, 1974.

¶22

(ii) Further to direct the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioner in the pay scale of Stenographer Grade-I and further to pay consequential benefit to the petitioner. (iii) For any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled to in accordance with law.”

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as Steno-Typist on 15^th June 1974 and till today he has been working on the same post under the respondent Bihar State Electricity Board. It is claimed that the petitioner is still in service even under the successor body of the respondent Board, and despite his representation and certain communications made by different authorities of the respondent Board or its successor body, his valid grievances are not being redressed.

¶24

After having heard the parties and on consideration of the materials available on record, as also in view of the nature of claim raised on behalf of the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping this matter pending any longer before this Court. However, interest of justice shall be sub-served if the petitioner is granted liberty to file a comprehensive representation with all supporting documents before respondent no.4 raising all the pleas, which have been raised in the present proceeding. It is ordered accordingly.

¶25

If such a representation is filed on behalf of the petitioner before respondent no.4 with all supporting documents and a

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.6216 of 2013 (2) dt.12-04-2013

¶27

3/3

¶28

certified copy of the present order within a period of one month from today, then the respondent no.4 and/or any other competent authority of the respondent Board/ Company shall be obliged to consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order. If on consideration of materials respondent no.4 and/or any other competent authority of the respondent Board or its successor body come to the conclusion that the grievances raised on behalf of the petitioner are admissible to him, then consequential order granting admissible relief shall be issued without any unnecessary delay.

¶29

Entire exercise must be completed by respondent no.4 and/or any other competent authority of the respondent Board/Company within a maximum period of six months from the date of filing of the representation by the petitioner.

¶30

The present writ petition stands finally disposed of with the observations and directions made above.

¶31

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

¶32

BTiwary/-

Madhukar Lal Karn v. The Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhukar Lal Karn v. The Bihar State Electricity Board 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

Ganauri Kumar Sinha Vs the State of Bihar

Lalit Kumar Prasad Singh Vs State Bank Of India and Ors.

Kamal Kant Jha Vs the State of Bihar

Ram Nandan Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Suresh Prasad Mishra Vs The Zonal Manager Uco Bank and Anr.

Fulena Prasad Singh Vs The Bihar State Power holding Company Limted and Ors.