Patna High CourtCWJC/13444/2008dismissed

Raj Manohar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-02-15Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13444 of 2008 ====================================================== Raj Manohar Prasad son of late Kesho Lal, Resident of MohallaSatsangnagar, P.S. Sherghati, District Gaya, at present working as InCharge Headmaster, Government Practicing Basic School, Serghati, Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

3. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

For the Respondent/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 15-02-2018 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State has assisted the Court.

2. The petitioner had moved the Court for the following reliefs:

"That, this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ (s), order (s) or direction to the respondents No. 2 and 3 to grant promotion to the petitioner from Lower Sub-ordinate Education Service cadre to Sub-ordinate Education Service Cadre in the light of letter

Patna High Court CWJC No.13444 of 2008 (4) dt.15-02-2018 2/2 No. 687 dated 30/11/2005, issued by the Director, Primary Education, Bihar and accordingly the petitioner had applied through proper channel and further to say the operation of memo No. 885 dated 18/07/2008 (Annexure8) by which the said promotion granted to others ignoring the petitioner."

3. The question basically relating to the claim for promotion from Lower Subordinate Education Service Cadre to Subordinate Education Service Cadre being the issue, though the writ petition was filed in the year 2008, but as per the averments in the reply to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner on 24.01.2012 stating that he was due to retire in February, 2014, i.e., four years back, it appears that the prayer has now become infructuous and that is why nobody is appearing on behalf of the petitioner to press the writ petition.

4. In view thereof, the writ petition stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/- U