Allowed

Mumtaz Alam v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC12 Jan 2015CWJC/22039/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged removal order from post of Chairman, Bihar Madarsa Board, alleging facts contrary to record regarding show cause submission. Court quashed impugned order due to non-application of mind and factual error but refused reinstatement as tenure expired, directing Government to consider merits separately pending Division Bench proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 212th December 2014 removed from post quashed; Government directed to consider show cause and afford personal hearing.

Mumtaz Alam Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22039 of 2014

¶2

====================================================== Mumtaz Alam son of Late Abdul Haliz resident of Mohalla T.Model School Lane, G.B.Road, Gaya .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Director (Admn) cum-Addl. Secretary, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The special Director, Secretary, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam & Mr. Md. Nasem Mukhtar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Roy Shivajee Nath, AAG-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶3

4 12-01-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and for the respondents.

¶4

In this case petitioner is challenging the Memo No. 833 dated 212^th December 2014 (Annexure-10) by which petitioner has been removed from the post of Chairman, Bihar Madarsa Board and Memo No. 8343 dated 12^th December 2014 (Annexure-10/a)by which the Special Director (Secondary) Education has been made in-charge Chairman of the Board.

¶5

This Court is not going into the merit of the case but is disposing of this petition on short point. The tenure of the Chairman has come to an end on 4^th January 2015. A PIL being CWJC No. 7870 of 2014 has been filed by Dr. Anjum Hashmi

¶6

Patna High Court CWJC No.22039 of 2014 (4) dt.12-01-2015

¶7

2/3

¶8

which led to these events and the Division Bench is still in seisin of the mater and this Court is not going to give any comment on the conduct of any of the parties.

¶9

It appears that the Special Director who was appointed to enquire into the conduct of the petitioner after enquiry, annexing the enquiry report, vide letter dated 21^st November 2014 (Annexure-8) the petitioner was asked to file show cause within a week and the petitioner filed his show cause on 1^st December 2014 i.e. explaining his stand. The Director, (Administrator Addl. Secretary, Respondent no.2) while passing the impugned order against the petitioner was required to take into consideration the show cause filed by him but from the impugned order (Annexure-10), where there is specific statement that the show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and he did not file the same which is per say completely an error of fact. The fact is that he had filed the show cause on the last date and the order has been passed on 12^th December 2014 which itself shows non-application of mind.

¶10

In this view of the matter, the impugned order, vide Memo No. 833 dated 12^th December 2014 (Annexure-10) is hereby quashed. As the period of the petitioner is over, this Court cannot give direction for reinstatement but the Government will

¶11

Patna High Court CWJC No.22039 of 2014 (4) dt.12-01-2015

¶12

3/3

¶13

consider his show cause and if so advised he may give personal hearing to the petitioner and take a decision on merit. As the tenure as Chairman came to an end, no order of effective relief can be passed in favour of petitioner.

¶14

The conduct of the petitioner and others is already under consideration before the Division Bench in PIL. With this observation and direction, this petition is

¶15

allowed.

¶16

(Shivaji Pandey, J)

¶17

Jay/-

¶18

Mumtaz Alam v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mumtaz Alam 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs The Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank and Ors.

Chandra Shekhar Jha and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

S.m.inam Ahmad Vs Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.

MD Kalimuddin Alias Md.Kalimud Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Sekhar Prasad Lal Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Ram Kripal Bhagat Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.