Sudhir Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sudhir Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent nos. 4 and 5 (the District Magistrate, Gaya and the District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, Selection Committee Group D Posts, Gaya) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.03.2025 (Annexure 10), dispose of the same in the light of the Division Bench order in LPA No. 121 of 2020 in accordance with law, preferably within 12 weeks, and pass the consequential order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's representation dated 07.03.2025, pending before the District Magistrate, Gaya notwithstanding his recommendation for appointment to a class-IV post, ought to be considered and disposed of in accordance with the Division Bench order in L.P.A No. 121 of 2019.

Court's answer

The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondent nos. 4 and 5 to consider the petitioner's representation sent through speed post on 07.03.2025 (Annexure 10) and dispose of the same in the light of the order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 121 of 2020.

Ratio / Principle

The representation is to be disposed of in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order, and consequential orders are to be passed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Harish Kumar, J.), Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6499 of 2025, decided 29-04-2025 (oral order): The petitioner, whose name had been duly recommended by the respondent authorities for appointment on a class-IV post in Anugrah Narayan Magadh Medical College and Hospital, Gaya, filed a representation before the District Magistrate, Gaya on 07.03.2025 pursuant to the Division Bench order in L.P.A No. 121 of 2019 (Sunita Kumari & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.); although the Deputy Collector, Gaya vide letter no. 1373 dated 04.11.2024 had directed him to appear before the duly constituted committee with all relevant documents and the checklist, no final order was passed, while identically situated persons were considered and appointed. Disposing of the writ petition, the Court directed respondent nos. 4 and 5 to consider the representation (sent through speed post on 07.03.2025, marked Annexure 10) and dispose of the same in the light of the Division Bench order in LPA No. 121 of 2020, in accordance with law, preferably within 12 weeks, and to pass the consequential order.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6499 of 2025

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

Sudhir Prasad Singh Son of Shri Arjun Prasad Singh Resident of Village and Post Office-Sikaria, Surj Mandir, Police Station-Paliganj, District-Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary Government of Bihar, Patna.

The Additional Chief Secretary, General Administrative Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

The Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.

The District Magistrate, Gaya.

The District Magistrate-Cum-Chairman, Selection Committee Group D Posts Gaya.

The Additional Collector, Gaya.

The District Development Commissioner, Gaya.

The Deputy Collector, Establishment, Gaya.

The District Welfare Officer, Gaya.

The Civil Surgeon-Cum-the Chief Medical Officer, Gaya.

The Additional Chief Medical Officer, Gaya.

... ... Respondent/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-15 Mr. Tej Pratap Singh, AC to AAG-15

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

2 29-04-2025 Heard the parties.

Notwithstanding the fact, the name of the petitioner

was duly recommended by the respondent authorities concerned for his appointment on class-IV post in Anugrah Narayan Magadh Medical College and Hospital, Gaya and a representation was filed by the petitioner in pursuant to the order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in

Patna High Court CWJC No.6499 of 2025(2) dt.29-04-2025 2/3

L.P.A No. 121 of 2019 (Sunita Kumari & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), before the District Magistrate, Gaya on 07.03.2025, the same has not been disposed off till date, though identically situated person, whose names were also recommended by the concerned authorities, their cases were duly considered and appointed.

Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra, learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that upon submission of the representation in pursuant to the decision of the learned Division Bench as aforenoted, the petitioner was further directed by the Deputy Collector, Gaya vide its letter no. 1373 dated 04.11.2024 to appear before the duly constituted committee and submit all the relevant documents, alongwith the checklist with the entire details. In response thereto, the petitioner submitted his appearance and presented all the relevant documents, but, the final order has not been passed till date, at the level of the District Magistrate, Gaya; hence the present writ petition.

Learned Advocate for the State fairly submitted that since the matter is in under consideration before the District Magistrate, Gaya, who is the competent authority, he shall look into the matter and pass necessary order, in accordance

Patna High Court CWJC No.6499 of 2025(2) dt.29-04-2025 3/3

with law.

Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the nature of grievance, aforenoted, the writ petition stands disposed off with a direction to the respondent no. 4 and 5 to consider the representation of the petitioner, which was duly sent through speed post on 07.03.2025, the copy of which is marked as Annexure 10 to the writ petition and dispose of the same in the light of the order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 121 of 2020 in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 12 weeks’ from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and pass the consequential order.

(Harish Kumar, J)

supratim/-

U