← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/2234/2020dismissed

(Dr.) Vinita Jha v. The State Of Bihar

2020-02-19Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2234 of 2020 ====================================================== (Dr.) Vinita Jha W/o Amrendra Kumar Chaudhary resident of VillageKrishnapuri, Rajput Tola, Kanhauli, P.S.- Mithanpura, District- Muzaffarpur, Presently posted as University Professor, Post Graduate Department of English, M.D.D.M. College Muzaffarpur under B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Vice- Chancellor, B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 4.

The Registrar, B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 5.

The Finance Officer, B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 6.

Prof. (Dr.) Kanu Priya W/o Late Arun Kumar, resident of Maripur, Church Road presently posted as Prof.-In- charge, M.D.D.M. College, Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Yugal Kishore, Sr. Advocate Mr. Shashi Bhushan Singh, For the Respondents :

Mr. Madanjeet Kumar GP 20 For the University :

Mr. Indrajesh Kumar, Advocate For Respondent No. 6 :

Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 20-02-2020 Heard learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective respondents.

From the office order contained in Memo No. B/198 dated 25th January, 1992 ( Annexure-1) it is apparently clear that the petitioner is at serial no. 20 whereas respondent no. 6 is at serial no. 5 of the office order.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2234 of 2020(2) dt.20-02-2020 2/2 In a situation where the petitioner is junior to the respondent no. 6, the Court does not find any merit in the contention of the petitioner that the respondent-University has committed illegality in deputing the respondent no. 6 as Professor Incharge in the Department of English. The Court does not find any infirmity in the decision of the University. The writ application lacks merit and is dismissed. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) BT/- U