In a writ petition, the petitioner claimed benefits under the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000, having been appointed after its effective date. The court found no merit, holding the question of state transfer inapplicable, and dismissed the petition.
The prayer for benefits under the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000 was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14571 of 2013 (3) dt.15-11-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14571 of 2013
====================================================== Ravindra Toppo S/o Late Domnik Toppo R/o Village- Kuro Khurd, P.S. Mahuatand in the district of Latehar (Jharkhand).
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar For the Respondent/s : M/s Rajiv Roy and Arun Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 3 15-11-2016 The petitioner has been appointed after the date of bifurcation of the State i.e. 15.11.2000, claiming the benefit arising from the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000. As the petitioner has been appointed after the due date i.e. 15.11.2000, the question of his transfer from one State to another State does not arise.
This Court does not find any merit in the present case and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Shivaji Pandey, J)
Mahesh/U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, appointed after the bifurcation of Bihar, is entitled to benefits under the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000.
Ravindra Toppo
The State of Bihar
Shivaji Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
