Disposed

Praphul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Sept 2022CWJC/5874/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of a writ petition seeking relief for a contractual employee regarding pending services and unpaid honorarium. The Court directed the District Magistrate to consider the petitioner's representation and issue a reasoned speaking order within eight weeks without expressing an opinion on the substantive submissions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.4 (District Magistrate, Madhubani) to consider petitioner's representation by a reasoned and speaking order within eight weeks.

Praphul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5874 of 2022

¶2

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

¶3

Praphul Kumar, Son of Late Bijay Kumar, Resident of Village-Kanhauli Mallik Tol, P.S.-Kanhauli, District-Madhubani.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secreary, Department of General Administration Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Bihar Prashashnik Sudhar Mission Society (B.P.S.M.) through its Director.

¶8

The Mission Director, B.P.S.M.S., Department of General Administration, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The District Magistrate-Cu-District Mision Director, Madhubani.

¶10

¶11

The Deputy Collector, Establishment, Madhubani.

¶12

The District Bhudan Yagyan Committee, Madhubani, through its Karyalaya Mantri.

¶13

The Karyalaya Mantri, District Bhudan Yagyan Committee Office, Madhubani.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr.Pramod Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr.M. Nasrul Huda Khan, SC 1 ======================================================

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶17

2 08-09-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working in contractual establishment as an Executive Assistant in the District Bhoodan Office whereafter his posting now is in lurch and his contractual services have not been continued though other similarly situated have been continued and that there is some arrears of honorarium pending with the Authorities. In this connection he has made an application/representation before the District Magistrate,

¶18

Patna High Court CWJC No.5874 of 2022(2) dt.08-09-2022 2/2

¶19

Madhubani (Annexure-7). His grievance is that no action has been taken on his representation.

¶20

Learned Counsel for the State submits that having regard to the nature of petitioner’s existence being contractual he would have no right, however, he is not in a position to dispute that petitioner’s representation is required to be considered and disposed of by the District Magistrate (Respondent No.4).

¶21

Considering the rival submissions, without expressing any opinion on submission of the parties and in view of the limited nature of prayer, writ application need not be kept pending, and is accordingly disposed of with a direction to Respondent No.4 to consider the petitioner’s representation by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, within eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this Order.

¶22

(Madhuresh Prasad, J)

¶23

shashank/-

¶24

Praphul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praphul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

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

Deepak Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjula Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Suraj Kumar (Executive Assistant), Vs The State of Bihar

Kumud Kishor Vs The State of Bihar

Arjun Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shiv Shankar Vs The State of Bihar