Uday Kumar Sharma And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16735 of 2018 ====================================================== 1.

Uday Kumar Sharma, son of Bhagwan Sharma, resident of villagePrasastdih, PS-Sabour, District-Bhagalpur 2.

Kapildeo Sah, son of Late Mado Sah, resident of Champa Nala Road, PSNathnagar, District-Bhagalpur 3.

Parmanand Paswan son of Muneshwar Paswan, resident of village-Gohario, PS-Jagdishpur, District-Bhagalpur 4.

Kishor Kinkar son of Ashok Kumar Jha, resident of Sujapur, Thakurbari Lane, PS-Nathnagar, District-Bhagalpur 5.

Rajesh Kumar son of Umesh Jha, resident of village-Lalbag, PSTilkamanjhi, District-Bhagalpur 6.

Neeraj Kumar Jaiswal son of Gyan Prakash Choudhary, resident of villageBarahat, PS-Barahat, District-Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, Mass Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, State of Bihar, Patna.

5.

District Mass Education Officer, Samastipur.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mritunjay Prasad Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey- AAG15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 06-08-2019 The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners should be considered in the light of judgment and order passed in the case of State of Bihar and others vs. Harendra Mishra and others in L.P.A. No. 1047 of

Patna High Court CWJC No.16735 of 2018(2) dt.06-08-2019 2/2 2017 arising from C.W.J.C. No. 384 of 2017.

In view of such submission, the competent authority will examine the matter as to whether fact, law and relief sought for in the present case, is identical to the aforesaid case. If that be so, the petitioners will be entitled to the identical relief as has been given to petitioners of that case, subject to outcome of the review as has been stated by the State in Civil Review No. 59 of 2018.

With the above observation and direction, this application is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U