Disposed

Umesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC25 Mar 2014CWJC/23780/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged order directing him to join Rural Development Department. Court held petitioner must report to DRDA Katihar and will be required to perform duties under existing contract. Renewal of term depends on satisfying the Chief Executive Officer regarding performance ability. No new substantive right created.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to report to Deputy Development Commissioner, D.R.D.A. Katihar within one week; renewal of term permitted only if Chief Executive Officer is satisfied with performance.

Umesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 23780 of 2013

¶2

====================================================== Umesh Kumar Son Of Late Chiranjiwi Lal Agrawal Resident of Officers’ Colony, West of Pole Factory, Mirchaibari (Katihar) P.S. And District - Katihar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 2. The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The Principal Secretary, General Administration, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Katihar 5. The Deputy Development Commissioner Cum-Chief Executive Officer, District Rural Development Agency, Katihar 6. Project Officer, District Rural Development Agency, (In short 'DRDA') Katihar .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukul Sinha, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Gautam Bose, AAG 8 with Mr. Rohit Mishra, AC to AAG 8. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 4 25-03-2014 The petitioner was appointed as Senior Accounts Officer in District Rural Development Agency (for short “D.R.D.A.”), Katihar on contractual basis after undergoing a process of selection for a period of two years with effect from 17.7.2007. The said period was subsequently extended by two

¶3

Patna High Court CWJC No.23780 of 2013 (4) dt.25-03-2014

¶4

2/3

¶5

years after its expiry on 16.07.2009. It is the petitioner’s case that he is still continuing and he is receiving the benefits of salary etc., as provided under the terms of contract. There is no formal renewal of the contract. In the present writ application, he is aggrieved by the Memo dated 30.09.2013, issued by the Deputy Development Commissioner – cum – Chief Executive Officer, D.R.D.A., Katihar, whereby he had been directed to join the Rural Development Department at Patna. His further grievance is that though he was appointed as Senior Accounts Officer in 2007, no charge of the said post was handed over to him and he was forced to perform the job of junior officers. It appears that the Rural Development Department, Patna refused to accept the petitioner’s joining and asked him to go back to Katihar, but there is no written communication to this effect to the petitioner, as per learned counsel for the petitioner. It appears that while issuing the impugned order dated 30.09.2013, asking the petitioner to join the Rural Development Department at Patna, the Chief Executive Officer, D.R.D.A., Katihar has recorded adverse comments upon the petitioner’s performance.

¶6

Be that as it may, the Rural Development Department has refused to accept the joining pursuant to the impugned order dated 30.09.2013 which it has rightly done. The petitioner will

¶7

Patna High Court CWJC No.23780 of 2013 (4) dt.25-03-2014

¶8

3/3

¶9

now be required to report to the Deputy Development Commissioner – cum – Chief Executive Officer, D.R.D.A., Katihar within one week from today. If the Chief Executive Officer, D.R.D.A., Katihar is not satisfied with the functioning of the petitioner, he can proceed but only in terms of the contract between the petitioner and the D.R.D.A. and not otherwise.

¶10

While taking any decision against the petitioner, the Chief Executive Officer will certainly consider his grievance that after his appointment as Senior Accounts Officer he was never handed over the charge of the post and, therefore, he did not have any opportunity to perform his duties as Senior Accounts Officer for the purpose of assessing his suitability. If he is able to satisfy the Deputy Development Commissioner – cum – Chief Executive Officer, D.R.D.A., Katihar about his performance and ability, he will take steps for renewal of the term, if he is found fit for such renewal.

¶11

This application is accordingly disposed of.

¶12

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)

¶13

Dilip.

Umesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh 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

Nathuni Ram Vs the Bihar Industrial Area Deve

Kamali Devi and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Ramesh Prasad Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Tapan Kumar Vs The Chairman Cum Managing Director Canara Bank and Ors.

Krishna Bihari Sinha k.b. Sinha Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Ravi Kumar @ Chhotan Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar