Allowed

Raj Narayan Mishra v. The Bihar Sanskrit Shikha Board and Ors.

Patna HC5 Dec 2018CWJC/8757/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Patna quashed an order by the Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board Chairman that referred a petitioner's dispute back to the school Headmaster. The court held this was an abdication of duty and remitted the matter to the Chairman for a fresh decision within three months.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 24.02.2015 quashed; matter remitted to Chairman for fresh decision within three months.

Raj Narayan Mishra Vs The Bihar Sanskrit… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8757 of 2015

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Raj Narayan Mishra,Son of Late Bindeshwar Mishra, Resident of Village + P.O. Etha, Via TCA Dholi, PS Sakra,Distt. Muzaffarpur

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board through its Chairman, East Boring Canal Road, Patna

¶7

The Secretary, ihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board through its Chairman, East Boring Canal Road, Patna

¶8

The State of Bihar

¶9

The Special Director, Secondary Education (Sanskrit and Madarsa), Govt. of Bihar, Patna

¶10

The District Magistrate, Samastipur

¶11

The District Education Officer (DEO), Samastipur

¶12

The Managing Committee of Shiv Balak Roy Sanskrit High School Malikpur, Post Office – Malikpur, PS Pusa, Distt. Samastipur through its Secretary Prabhat Kumar Roy

¶13

Sri Devendra Roy Sharma, son of Late Ram Briksha Sharma, Resident of Village and Post Office Malikpur, PS Pusa, Distt. Samastipur, The then ex Headmaster Shiv Balak Roy Sanskrit High School Malikpur, Post Office – Malikpur, PS Pusa, Distt. Samastipur

¶14

Sri Ram Binod Jha, son of late Mahabir Jha, resident of Village Malpur, Post Office Etha, Via TCA Dholi, PS Sakra, Distt. Muzaffarpur- 843121

¶15

... ... Respondent/s

¶16

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jay Prakash Sharma, Advocate For the BSSB : Mr. S S Sundaram, Advocate Mr. Shashank Shekhar Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG 13 Mr. Ravi Kumar, AC to AAG 13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER

¶17

2 05-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶18

Earlier the petitioner approached this Court in CWJC

¶19

No. 6485 of 2013 which was disposed of by order dated

¶20

01.07.2014. The relevant part of the order reads as follows:-

¶21

“This Court is of the view that the matter can be enquired into and decided by the Board after

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.8757 of 2015(2) dt.05-12-2018 2/3

¶23

hearing the parties.

¶24

This writ application is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the Chairman of the Board to notice the concerned parties, fix up a date for hearing and take a final decision in respect of the status of petitioner in the college. The Chairman shall be well advised to decide the matter within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.”

¶25

After the order of the writ court the Chairman of the Board who was entrusted with the responsibility to decide the dispute passed most evasive order on 24.02.2015 which reads as follows:-

¶26

“ lHkh vfHky[kksa ds voyksdu ls ;g Li’V gksrk gS fd izlaxk/khu f”ko ckyd jk; laLdr mPp fo|ky;] efydkSM+s] leLrhiqj dks bl dk;kZy; ds Kkikad 3628 fnukad 20-12-2012 ds }kjk ladYi la0 117 fnukad 03-02-2011 ds vkyksd esa ftyk f”k{kk inkf/kdkjh] leLrhiqj ds i=kad 2381 fnukad 18-11-2011 ds vkyksd esa izLohdfr iznku dh x;h gSA fo|ky; oÙkZeku esa foÙk jfgr dh Js.kh esa gSA fo| ky; ds iz/kkuk/;kid ,oa lfpo dks vkns”k fn;k tkrk gS fd oknh Jh jkt ukjk;.k feJ ds }kjk lefiZr dkxtkr ds vk/kkj ij fo|ky; esa lsok ds laca/k esa fu;ekuqlkj dkjokbZ dh tk;A

¶27

bl izdkj bl okn dk fu’iknu fd;k tkrk gSA

¶28

This Court directed the Chairman to decide but the Chairman instead of deciding the claim of the petitioner has referred the matter to the Secretary and the Headmaster of the school against whose action the petitioner had to approach the Court in CWJC No. 6485 of 2013. The decision of the Chairman

¶29

Patna High Court CWJC No.8757 of 2015(2) dt.05-12-2018 3/3

¶30

in the aforesaid circumstances is clear abdication of responsibility entrusted by this Court. The decision on the face of it is in teeth of the direction and cannot sustain.

¶31

Accordingly, the order contained in Anneuxre-7 dated 24.02.2015 is quashed. The matter is remitted back to the Chairman of the Board to take a fresh decision irrespective of the Secretary and the Headmaster of the school appears or not and decide the entitlement of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶32

The writ application is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove.

¶33

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J)

¶34

mrl./-

¶35

Raj Narayan Mishra v. The Bihar Sanskrit Shikha Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Narayan Mishra v. The Bihar Sanskrit Shikha Board 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

Md. Afroz Alam Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Pradeep Kumar and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Birendra Kumar Lohara @ Birendra Kumar Mistri @ Birendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mr. S.m. Quasmi Vs The State Of Bihar Through Secretary Human Resources Department and Anr.

Renu Kumari and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Nitesh Kumar Choudhary Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.