Sunil Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2911 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.
Sunil Mahto Son of Late Keshwar Mahto Resident of Village- Sarai, P.OSarai Maner, P.S.-Sarai Maner, District-Patna, PIN-801113. 2.
Surbhi Kumari Daughter of Narendra Kumar Singh Resdent of VillageDanaganj, P.O. Dhobia Kalapur, P.S. Naubatpur, Distict-Patna, PIN-800119. 3.
Upendra Kumar Son of Sri Suresh Prasad Resident of Etwari Bazar, P.O.- Biharsharif, P.S.-Biharsharif, District-Nalanda, PIN Code-803101. 4.
Arun Kumar Son of Upendra Prasad Yadav Resdent of Village-Dilawarpur, Near SDRF Office, P.O. Bihata, P.S.-Bihta, District-Patna PIn 801103. 5.
Sunny Kumar Son of Sunil Mahto Resdent of Village-Sarai, P.O.-Sarai Maner, P.S.-Sarai Maner, District-Patna, PIN-801113. 6.
Rinki Kumari Daughter of Upendra Ram Resident of Etwari Bazar, Mogal Kuan, Biharsharif, Nalanda, PIN Code-803101.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Collector, Buxar. 2.
The Deputy Collector (Nazarat), Buxar, District-Buxar. 3.
The Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Bihar, Secretariat, Patna.
4.
The Secretary, Department of Personnel, Secretariat, Patna. 5.
The Secretary, Department of Labour, Secretariat, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ajay Prasad For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Government Pleader (5) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 14-03-2024 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- "1(i). For quashing the order dated 03.09.2022 issued vide letter no.080699 (Annexure-2) issued by the respondent No. 2 Nazarat Deputy Collector, Buxar whereas the representation dated 08.10.2022 has been rejected without granting
Patna High Court CWJC No.2911 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 2/2 opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, without considering the facts and circumstances of this case which is unconstitutional, as well as date of representation has not been mentioned in the rejection order and also in paragraph no.11 of this application.
(ii). For issuance of a direction to the respondent authority for appointment of the petitioner made by the respondent individual manner.
(iii). For appointment of the petitioner, who is an eligible for the aforesaid post."
2.
After some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks not to press the present writ petition, however, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioners to approach the Respondents authorities for redressal of their aforesaid grievances. Liberty, so sought, is granted.
3.
The present writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U