← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/2678/2020dismissed

Vinay Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2023-08-22Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2678 of 2020 ====================================================== Vinay Kumar Singh Son of Sri Raj Narayan Singh, resident of VillageBathnaha, P.O. Bakatpur, P.S.- Kathaiya, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources and Development Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

4.

The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur.

5.

The District Public Education Officer, Adult and Non Formal Education, Muzaffarpur.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pawan Kumar Singh, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Smt.Binita Singh (SC28) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 22-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioners have approached this court for regularization of their services as Non-formal Education Instructors.

3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners does not dispute the fact that the petitioners did not approach this court prior to the cutoff date, with respect to the relief by virtue of their having discharged duties as Instructors under the Non-Formal Education Scheme.

4. The said fact not being in dispute, having regard

Patna High Court CWJC No.2678 of 2020(2) dt.22-08-2023 2/2 to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of The State of Bihar and Ors. versus Prabhat Ranjan passed in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 32079 of 2015 dated 26.02.2016, and the recent decision of this court in the case of The State of Bihar and Ors. versus Harendra Mishra and Ors. passed in Civil Review No. 59 of 2018 following the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the petitioners' claim for regularization or absorption is not tenable.

5. Writ application is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) uttam/- U