Single judge disposed the writ petition by directing the State to grant benefits to the petitioner if his case is analogized to C.W.J.C. No. 9921 of 2017 as affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Petitioner directed authority to examine facts and law and extend benefits if case is covered by Supreme Court judgment in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 23778 of 2018.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15953 of 2014
===========================================================
Shiv Shankar Prasad son of Late Lakshman Prasad, resident of village- Thakur Asthan, P.O.+P.S.- Bandhu Ganj, District- Jehanabad
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Respondent/s
=========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Satyadeo Kumar -SC5
Mr. Saroj Kumar, AC to SC5
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09-10-2018
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the facts of the present case are identical to the case of C.W.J.C. No. 9921 of 2017 (Binit Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) and its analogues cases, which has been affirmed by the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 1702 of 2017 and that has been
affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 23778 of 2018, the aforesaid orders squarely cover the issue
Patna High Court CWJC No.15953 of 2014 dt.09-10-2018
2 /2
involved in the present case.
In such view of the matter, the concerned authority is directed to examine the facts, law and prayer of the case of the petitioner and if it is found that present case is squarely covered by the aforesaid cases, the same benefit should also be extended to the petitioner.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.
(Shivaji Pandey, J)
Vinay/Sunny
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| UploadingDate | 10.10.2018 |
| Transmission Date |
NA |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioner's case is covered by the Supreme Court judgment in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 23778 of 2018 and analogous writ petitions.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Binit Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.Referred¶21
C.W.J.C. No. 9921 of 2017
Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 1702 of 2017Referred¶21
Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 23778 of 2018Referred¶21
Shiv Shankar Prasad
The State of Bihar
Shivaji Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
