Dismissed

Birendra Narayan v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC10 Jul 2014L.P.A/532/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed an Letters Patent Appeal filed by a government employee who challenged a writ judgment rejecting his claim for cadre shift. The single judge had dismissed the writ petition based on delay and laches, noting the appellant had served for ten years and non-respondents were involved in the favouritism allegation. The appellate court upheld the dismissal, holding the clai

What did the court decide?

No relief; the appeal was dismissed affirming the lower court's rejection of the writ petition.

Birendra Narayan Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.532 of 2012

¶3

¶4

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2555 of 2012

¶5

====================================================== Birendra Narayan S/o Sri Sunder Lal Yadav, R/o Village-Bakainia, P.S.+P.O.-Pallaci, District- Araria, at present posted as District Programme Officer, Kishanganj.

¶6

.... .... Petitioner-Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State Of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

¶9

The Principal Secretary, Department Of General Administrative Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna

¶10

The Secretary, General Administrative Department Bihar, Patna

¶11

The Principal Secretary, Department Of Human Resources Development Department Vikash Bhawan, New Secretariat, Patna

¶12

The Director, (Administration) -Cum-Deputy Secretary, Department Of Human Resources Development Department,Vikash Bhawan, New Secretariat, Patna

¶13

The Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, Patna

¶14

The Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15 Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, Patna

¶15

The Deputy Secretary-Cum-Examination Controller of Bihar Public Service Commission, 15 Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, Patna

¶16

Sri Shiv Ranjan , presently posted as Senior Deputy Collector , Mid Day Meal In-Charge, Sasaram (Rohtas)

¶17

.... .... Respondents-Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Ram Bilash Mahto, Sr. Advocate Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, Advocate Mr. Brajesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Respondents 1 to 5: Mr. Manoj Kr. Ambastha, GP-14

¶18

Mr. Tripurari Nath Ambastha, A.C. to G.P.14 For the Respondent State : Mr. Lalit Kishore, Sr. Advocate Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate

¶19

Patna High Court LPA No.532 of 2012 (2) dt.10-07-2014

¶20

2/3

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And

¶23

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶24

2 10-07-2014

¶25

Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 5^th March 2012 made by the learned single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.2555 of 2012, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause-X of the Letters Patent.

¶26

The appellant is the successful candidate in the 44^th combined competitive examination 1988 conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission for recruitment to the posts in civil service of the State of Bihar in several cadres. Having succeeded, the appellant was offered employment in Bihar Education Service. He has accepted the said offer and he has joined the Bihar Education Service since June 2005. Having served as such for seven years, in 2012 the appellant raised a dispute in respect of order of merit vis-à-vis the respondent No.9. According to the appellant, the result of the respondent No.9 was manipulated. In absence of such manipulation the appellant would have secured employment either in administrative service or in police service.

¶27

The learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the grounds of delay and laches and also on merits. Therefore, this Appeal.

¶28

Learned advocate Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy has appeared for the appellant. He has vehemently submitted that the respondent No.9 being the son-in-law of one Tej Narain Singh, the Section Officer in the Bihar Public Service Commission, had been favoured.

¶29

Patna High Court LPA No.532 of 2012 (2) dt.10-07-2014

¶30

3/3

¶31

Be that as it may, in absence of the aforesaid Tej Narain Singh as party respondent we cannot hear on allegations made against the said Tej Narain Singh. The claim has rightly been rejected on the principles of delay and laches as by now the appellant has put in nearly ten years’ service in Bihar Education Service. The request/claim for shifting the cadre at this stage can not be entertained.

¶32

Appeal is dismissed.

¶33

(R.M. Doshit, CJ)

¶34

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

¶35

K.C.jha/U

Birendra Narayan v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birendra Narayan 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

Mukund Kumar Jha @ Mukund Kumar Vs The Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga University and Ors.

In The Matter Inmates Of Women Remand Home At Gaighat, Patna Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ajay Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Chandra Shekhar Prasad Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Mohan Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Awadhesh Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.