Dismissed

Pawan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC6 Mar 2019L.P.A/822/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court in Letters Patent Appeal rejected the appellant's challenge to the setting aside of his writ petition. The court held that no challenge was raised regarding the single judge's finding on vacancy non-availability at the time of the writ petition decision, thus precluding re-examination.

What did the court decide?

The appeal against the dismissal of the writ petition regarding appointment is rejected as it lacks merit.

Pawan Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.822 of 2018 In

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1276 of 2015

¶3

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

¶4

Pawan Kumar, son of Sri Charitar Prasad Yadav, resident of village Paharpur, Police Station-Simri Bakhtiarpur, District-Saharsa.

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

The Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The Director, Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶10

The Deputy Director-cum-Deputy Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶11

The District Magistrate, Saharsa.

¶12

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Saharsa.

¶13

The District Panchayat Officer, Saharsa.

¶14

The Secretary, Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Veterinary College, Patna.

¶15

... ... Respondent/s

¶16

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar, A.C. to A.A.G.-6 For the S.S.C. ; Mr. Ashok Kumar Debey, Advocate

¶17

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶18

Date : 06-03-2019

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

¶20

The appellant has come up questioning the correctness of the impugned judgment dated 30^th of April, 2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No.1276 of 2015 on the ground that

¶21

the appellant has been pursuing his remedy before this Court since the year 2006 seeking appointment and in

¶22

Patna High Court L.P.A No.822 of 2018 dt.06-03-2019 2/4

¶23

spite of the vacancies being available, the appellant was not accommodated. The learned single Judge has committed an error in proceeding to analyse the facts and has arrived at an incorrect conclusion that the appellant cannot be accommodated now as no posts are available.

¶24

Learned counsel submits that the respondents were granted time on 23^rd July, 2018 to file a counter affidavit and in the absence of any response, this fact should be presumed that the vacancies were existing.

¶25

We have considered the submissions raised. Annexure 14 to the writ petition, which is a requisition by the Director, Panchayati Raj to the Secretary, Bihar Staff Selection Commission dated 29^th June, 2013, records the sending of a requisition for 40 posts in the District of Saharsa. It is therefore evident that as in the year 2013 there were 40 posts vacant on the basis whereof the appellant came up before this Court in the writ petition giving rise to present appeal in the year 2015 contending that the vacancies were available, the appellant deserves to be considered in the light of the earlier litigation.

¶26

A counter affidavit to the same was filed on behalf of the respondents and the learned counsel for the appellant has invited the attention of the Court to

¶27

Patna High Court L.P.A No.822 of 2018 dt.06-03-2019 3/4

¶28

paragraph 37 of the counter affidavit to contend that the respondents have admitted the vacancies.

¶29

We have perused paragraph 37 and the said admission is in relation to the letter dated 30^th of May, 2009 about the existence of the vacancies. Nonetheless, even assuming that the vacancies were tendered for being filled up in the year 2013, the question before the learned single Judge was as to whether on the date when the writ petition was being decided i.e. on 30^th April, 2018, any vacancy was available or not or otherwise also when the writ petition was filed in the year 2015 any further vacancy was available or not.

¶30

From the grounds taken in the appeal and the averments made, we do not find any challenge having been raised with regard to the finding recorded by the learned single Judge on the non-availability of the vacancy. The said finding recorded by the learned single Judge of any contemporaneous vacancy being available either in the year 2015 or even thereafter in the absence of any such challenge raised or the ground taken, it will not be possible for this Court while sitting in this intra-Court appeal to examine any other fact inasmuch as the relief can be provided only if the vacancy is available.

¶31

Patna High Court L.P.A No.822 of 2018 dt.06-03-2019 4/4

¶32

The appeal accordingly lacks merit and is

¶33

rejected.

¶34

(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ)

¶35

(Anjana Mishra, J)

¶36

PNM/Saif

¶37

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE	N.A.
Uploading Date
Transmission Date	N.A.

Pawan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar 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

Mister Aalam and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dr. Kamal Deo Sharama Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Suraj Bhushan And Ors. Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Ratan Sharma @ Ram Ratan Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Maharana Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Nitish Kumar @ Nitesh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Govt. of Bihar, Patna and Ors.