Appeal filed by father and daughter challenging failure to appoint appellant-2 as Chowkidar on compassionate grounds after appellant-1's retirement. Court held no surviving claim as appellant-1 officially retired. Appeal dismissed.
Application for appointment of appellant-2 dismissed without order as to costs.
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.
I N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.86 of 2021
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2078 of 2020
==============================================
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Gopal Govind Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, AC to AAG-3 ======================================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR)
Advocate for the appellants and Mr. Suman Kumar Jha,
the learned AC to AAG -3 for the State.
The appellants are aggrieved by the decision of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.86 of 2021(4) dt.28-04-2023 2/3
the authorities in not giving employment of a Chowkidar to appellant no. 2, even when her father (appellant no. 1), a serving Chowkidar has declared his intention of taking voluntary retirement much before the due date of his retirement.
It appears from the record that the date of birth shown by appellant no. 1 in his service record is 02.03.1960 which makes his retirement age sometimes in the year 2019. However, there being some dispute with respect to the correctness of the appellant no. 1, he was subjected to a medical test when his date of birth was shifted to an anterior date. This led to the retirement of appellant no. 1 on 28.02.2018. Till that date, he had received his allowances and the application for seeking voluntary retirement is of a posterior date.
Thus, the claim of the appellant no. 1 for appointment of his daughter (appellant no. 2) in his place as Chowkidar, stood frustrated.
The appellants had sought to challenge three proceedings in one writ petition before the learned Single
Patna High Court L.P.A No.86 of 2021(4) dt.28-04-2023 3/3
Judge. Precisely, for this reason the issues could not be thrashed out properly.
Be that as it may, there is no surviving claim of the appellant no. 2 for being appointed on compassionate ground as a Chowkidar in place of appellant no. 1 (her father), who according to the official records, has already retired after receiving all the emoluments and due till the last date of his retirement.
There is no merit in this appeal and the same is
dismissed but without any order as to costs.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J)
( Harish Kumar, J)
sunilkumar/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the claim for appointment of the daughter of the appellant on compassionate grounds survives when the parent has officially retired.
Whether the delay in applying for voluntary retirement and the subsequent re-adjustment of the date of birth patent the appointment of the daughter.
Mitan Paswan
Sushma Kumari
State of Bihar
Director General of Police, Bihar
District Establishment Committee, Patna
District Magistrate, Patna
Ashutosh Kumar
Harish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
