Disposed

Shyam Sundar Sharma v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC2 Mar 2015CWJC/16628/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired petitioner sought promotion as Chief Engineer. Court quashed the writ petition instead of dismissal, accepting the respondent's assurance that the Public Service Commission would consider the case. Court directed the department to abide by its stand.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of without dismissal, based on the respondent's assurance that the Public Service Commission will consider the case.

Shyam Sundar Sharma Vs the State of Bihar and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16628 of 2007

¶3

====================================================== Shyam Sundar Sharma, s/o Late Bans Lal Sharma, resident of village Dedhsaiya P.S. kako District Jehanabad

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar

¶7

1. Joint Secretary, Water Resources (Irrigation) Department, Govt. of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, patna

¶8

1. Deputy Secretary - cum-Chief Vigilance officer, Water Resources Department, Govt. of bihar, sinchai Bhawan, Patna

¶9

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mr. Dr.Rajendra Prasad Mr. Ramakant Sharma

¶10

For the Respondent/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 02-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to AAG No. 6.

¶12

The petitioner, who retired on 31.1.1993, after more than 14 years of retirement has approached this court by filing the present writ petition with a prayer to grant him regular promotion on the post of Chief Engineer with effect from 1.8.1992.

¶13

In normal course I would have rejected the writ petition only on the ground that writ petition was filed after much belated stage. However, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that in the 2^nd supplementary counter affidavit, which has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 1 to 3 duly sworn by one

¶14

Patna High Court CWJC No.16628 of 2007 (3) dt.02-03-2015

¶15

2/2

¶16

Sri Rabindra Kumar Shankar, Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, it has been indicated that the case of the petitioner for consideration has been sent to B.P.S.C. i.e. Bihar Public Service Commission and needful action will be taken. It was submitted that in view of statement made in paragraph no. 4 of the 2^nd supplementary counter affidavit, there is no need to keep the matter pending.

¶17

The writ petition stands disposed of

¶18

The court expects that the Department may abide by their stand taken in the 2^nd supplementary counter affidavit.

¶19

(Rakesh Kumar, J)

¶20

Praful/-

¶21

Shyam Sundar Sharma v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Sundar Sharma 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

Beda Nand Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Mahavir Yadava Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Dev Narayan Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Jagnarayan Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Rabindra Nath Chaturvedi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Anil Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.