Dismissed

Ram Karan Paswan v. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary

Patna HC17 Feb 2022CWJC/9259/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners seeking writ of Mandamus for absorption into Class-IV posts as former Non Formal Education instructors. Court dismissed petition due to lack of demonstrated legal and statutory right ingredients, directing filing of detailed representation.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; petitioners directed to approach competent authority with detailed representation within eight weeks.

Ram Karan Paswan 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.9259 of 2021

¶2

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

¶3

Ram Karan Paswan S/o Waso Paswan @ Baso Paswan resident of Ward No. 1, Narhan P.S. Bibhutipur, Dist. - Samastipur.

¶4

Ram Kishor Ram S/o Late Saryug Ram Resident of Khoksaha, Khoksaha, Madhopur, P.S. Bibhutipur, Dist. - Samastipur.

¶5

Sakal Deo Yadav S/o Mahendra Yadav Resident of ward No. 5, Mahuli Tola, Hahiya, Masurgarh, P.S. Rosera, Dist- Samastipur.

¶6

Bajrang Karak, S/o Ramchandar Karak Resident of Rosera Ward No. 18, Lakshmipur, P.S. Rosera, Dist- Samastipur.

¶7

... ... Petitioner/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, New Secretariat, Vikash Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna.

¶10

The Director, (Primary and Elementary Education), Human Resources Development Department New Secretariat, Vikash Bhawan, Bailey Road Patna, Bihar.

¶11

The Director, Mass Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶12

The Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga.

¶13

The District Superintendent of Education, Samastipur.

¶14

The District Education Officer, Samastipur.

¶15

... ... Respondent/s

¶16

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

¶17

Appearance :

¶18

For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Mira Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Kameshwar Kumar (GP 17) ======================================================

¶19

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT

¶20

Date : 17-02-2022

¶21

This matter is heard via video conferencing due to cir-

¶22

cumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

¶23

Learned State counsel accepts notice for respondents.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners is hereby directed to

¶25

furnish a copy of the petition to learned counsel for the State if it not already furnished.

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.9259 of 2021 dt.17-02-2022 2/3

¶27

In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the

¶28

following relief(s):-

¶29

“For issuance of order/s, direction/s, writ/s preferably in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents concerned to absorb present petitioners on any suitable Class -IV posts who are Ex-Non Formal Education Instructors in the light of direction of this Hon'ble Court as also by Hon'ble Apex Court despite the fact that petitioners are the petitionersbefore this Hon'ble Court and Hon'ble Apex Cout passed in SLP(civil)No. 32079/2015 till cut-off date i.e. 26.02.2016as framed by Hon'ble Apex Court and even they have already submitted all the required and relevant papers/documents as demanded by the Respondent authority concerned for their absorption but the authority concerned are sitting tight over the genuine claim of the petitioners.”

¶30

For issuance of writ of mandamus there must be two in-

¶31

gredients namely legal and statutory right followed by demand before the competent authority. Perusal of the writ petition both the ingredients are not forthcoming, therefore, the present petition cannot be entertained in the light of Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of Mani Subrat Jain vs. State of Haryana reported in (1977) 1 SCC 486.

¶32

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent au-

¶33

Patna High Court CWJC No.9259 of 2021 dt.17-02-2022 3/3

¶34

thority in submitting a detailed representation along with the judicial pronouncements, if any within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of petitioner’s representation the competent authority is hereby directed to pass a speaking order and communicate to the petitioner within a reasonable period

¶35

of time.

¶36

(P. B. Bajanthri, J)

¶37

Vikash/-

¶38

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

Ram Karan Paswan v. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Karan Paswan v. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Singh, Vs The State of Bihar

Rajendra Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Dev Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Upendra Kumar Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Kumar Vs The Union of India through the Secretary

Pooja Kumari, Vs The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary