Dismissed¶21

Ashesh Kumar Chaudhary v. Lalit Narayan Mithila University and Ors.

Maintainability – Regularization/Absorption

Patna HC17 Nov 2025CWJC/15739/2016

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regularization; absorption; contract of employment must subsist; maintainability of writ petition; petitioner not in service on date of filing; Lalit Narayan Mithila University; Vice-Chancellor; Registrar; P.G Department Home Science; State of Bihar HRD Department; Patna High Court; Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15739 of 2016; decided 17-11-2025; Justice Alok Kumar Sinha; writ dismissed.

What did the court decide?

A subsisting contract of employment is a prerequisite for claiming relief of regularization/absorption in service. ¶21

Ashesh Kumar Chaudhary Vs Lalit Narayan Mithila University and Ors. — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15739 of 2016

¶2

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

¶3

Ashesh Kumar Chaudhary Son of late Dr. Vishudhanand Chaudhary, Resident of Village- Nehra, P.O.- Nehra, P.S.- Manigachi, District- Darbhanga.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

Lalit Narayan Mithila University

¶7

The Vice- Chancellor, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga.

¶8

The Registrar, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. null null

¶9

The Head of the P.G Department, Home Science, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Da

¶10

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patn

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

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

¶13

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Nath Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vvinay Kumar Mishra, A.C. to AAG-15. For the University : Mr. Iqbal Asif Niazi, Advocate ======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶15

12 17-11-2025

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶17

counsel appearing for the State as well as learned counsel for the University.

¶18

The petitioner submits that in the present writ application, the petitioner is claiming relief of regularization/absorption in service.

¶19

On specific query made by the Court as to whether on the date of filing of the writ application, the petitioner was in service, meaning thereby whether the contract of employment was subsisting, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner very

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.15739 of 2016(12) dt.17-11-2025 2/2

¶21

fairly submits that on the date of filing of writ application claiming relief of regularization, the petitioner was not in service, and therefore, no contract of employment was subsisting. It is by now well settled that for claiming relief of regularization/ absorption, the contract of employment must subsist. The present writ application, is therefore, dismissed as not maintainable for claiming relief of regularization because on the date of filing the writ application the petitioner was not in service.

¶22

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)

¶23

sanjeev/-

¶24

Ashesh Kumar Chaudhary v. Lalit Narayan Mithila University and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashesh Kumar Chaudhary v. Lalit Narayan Mithila University and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandra Deo Singh Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Ranjit Kumar Raut Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Z. a. Islamia College through its Secretary, Shri Zafar Ahmad Ghani Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Vimal Kishore Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Archana Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Kumari Premlata Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.