This high court dismissed the writ petition challenging a representation dated 06.02.2012 for disposal and unpaid salary. The court found no right to claim disposal of the representation.
Writ petition for disposal of representation and payment of unpaid salary dismissed as misconceived.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16368 of 2013
======================================================
Ugeshwar Ureon Son Of Podha Uraon Resident Of Village- Walkahawa, P.O.Chiutaha, P.S.- Chituhe, District- West Champaran, Bettiah
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr.Manish Kumar, GP VIII ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-01-2023 No body appears for the petitioner.
The petitioner has prayed as under :
“……… for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions for commanding the respondent no. 1 to dispose the representation dated 06.02.2012 as early as possible which is pending since long, which salary of the petitioner since 09.03.2008 to 23.03.2009 has not been paid to the petitioner by the respondents.”
The writ petition is for disposal of the representation
would not lie and there is no right under the Act for claiming the disposal of the representation.
More over, as per the counter affidavit filed, it is mentioned that the petitioner as per service book was relieved
Patna High Court CWJC No.16368 of 2013(2) dt.10-01-2023 2/2
from Bhojpur district on 03.03.2008 but did not join the office of Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur, up to 10.09.2009 and remained absent from 10.03.2008 to 09.09.2009 for which the Superintendent of Police has granted him 548 days extra ordinary leave.
Keeping in view thereto, the petitioner can not claim salary for the period.
The writ petition is misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J)
Shamshad/Item No. 25 U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition for disposal of a pending representation and payment of unpaid salary can be maintained when the petitioner has no right to claim such disposal and the impugned representation
Whether the petitioner can claim salary for the period when he remained absent without valid reason and was granted extraordinary leave.
Ugeshwar Ureon
The State Of Bihar
Inspector General Of Police Bhagalpur
Deputy Inspector General Of Police, Bhagalpur
Superintendent Of Police, Jamui
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
