← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/11194/2017disposed

Shiv Bachan Ram Tatwa v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2021-08-12Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11194 of 2017 ====================================================== Shiv Bachan Ram Tatwa Son of late Ram Nevaj Tatwa Resident of Village Chaugaon, P.S. Murar, Distt. Buxar.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Dehri-On-Sone, BuxarRohtas.

3.

The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Sichai Bhawan, Patna.

4.

Executive Engineer, Sone Canal Division, Bikramganj, Rohtas. 5.

Junior Engineer, Sone Canal Division, Rohtas. 6.

The District Magistrate, Rohtas.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binoy Kumar Sinha-1 :

Mr.Rajiv Ranjan Kumar Pandey :

Mr.Kritya Nand Jha For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Anjani Kumar (AAG 4) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-08-2021 This matter has been taken up for hearing online because of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.

It appears from a supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner that he has simultaneously approached the Bihar State Human Rights Commission, raising the same grievance, as raised in the present writ application. It further transpires that the respondents have agreed that all admitted dues shall be paid to the petitioner soon. It is only because of some technical glitch, the payments have not been made.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11194 of 2017(10) dt.12-08-2021 2/2 Considering the above, this application stands disposed of with an observation that the Court expects that all dues which the petitioner is admittedly entitled to is paid to him. A stand has been taken on behalf of the State of Bihar that the petitioner was dismissed from service by an order dated 31.12.2013, a copy of which has been brought on record by way of Annexure-A to the counter affidavit.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has, however, contended that the said order of dismissal was never communicated to him.

Be that as it may, the respondents shall ensure that what is admittedly due to the petitioner, is paid to him. This application stands disposed of accordingly. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) AKASH/- U