← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/2805/2017dismissed

Kundan Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-09-05Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2805 of 2017 ====================================================== Kundan Prasad, son of late Tapeshwar Das, resident of Mohalla - Amruddi Gali, Arya Kumar Road, Post Office - Bankipur, Police Station - Kadamkuan, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Nagar Vikash and Awash Department, Urban Department of Housing, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Secretary, Nagar Vikash and Awash Department, Urban Department of Housing, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Director, Nagar Palika Administration cum Joint Secretary, Nagar Vikash and Awash Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5.

The District Magistrate, Gaya.

6.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Tekari, Gaya.

7.

Mrs. Sinddhu Jain as Ex Chairman, W/o Sri Sanjay Jain, Main Road, Rikabganj, near police station- Tekari, Police Station - Tekari, District - Gaya. 8.

Sri Sanjay Jain, Ex-Chairman, S/o unknown, Main Road, Rikabganj, near police station- Tekari, Police Station - Tekari, District - Gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT & ORDER Date : 05-09-2017 An order, dated 09.01.2017, issued by Urban Development and Housing Department, Govt. of Bihar, under the signature of Director, Nagarpalika Prasasan, is under challenge, whereby, the petitioner has been repatriated to his parent department, i.e., Cooperative Department, Govt. of Bihar.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2805 of 2017 dt.05-09-2017 2/2

2. It is settled principle of law that an employee cannot claim continuance on a deputed post.

3. From the impugned order, I find that repatriation has been ordered in view of certain allegations made against the petitioner. The repatriation order does not require any interference.

4. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

5. So far as the departmental enquiry, initiated against the petitioner, is concerned, the same being altogether different cause of action, the petitioner shall be at liberty to pursue the same in accordance with law.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Praveen-II/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 06.09.2017 Transmission Date N/A