Nawal Kishor Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15626 of 2017 ====================================================== Nawal Kishor Prasad Singh, S/o Late Jagdish Prasad Singh, Resident of Village P.O.- Devnagar, Uchchirama, P.S. Sherghati, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through, the Principal Secretary, Education Department. null null
2. The Vice- Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga.
3. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga.
4. The Governing Body, Deobharti Sanskrit Upshastri College at and P.O. Deonagar Uchirma via Cherki District Gaya, through its Secretary.
5. In-charge Principal, Deobharti Sanskrit Upshastri College at and P.O. Deonagar Uchirma via Cherki District Gaya.
6. The Controller of Examination, B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur.
7. The Controller of Examinations, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya.
8. Sri Ramesh Kumar, S/o Late Madheshwar Sharma, Presently working as Math Professor at, Deobharti Sanskrit Upshastri College at and P.O. Deonagar Uchirma via Cherki District Gaya. Permanent R/o Village+ Post- Noawan, P.S. Shakurabad, District- Jehanabad. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Smt. Shilpa Singh -GA12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 12-03-2018 Challenging the appointment of respondent no.8 to the University in question on the ground that he is not qualified, this writ petition has been filed.
Apart from the fact that the petitioner's public interest antecedent for raising the issue is not made out, we are,
Patna High Court CWJC No.15626 of 2017 (2) dt.12-03-2018 2/2 prima facie, satisfied that he does not have any locus standi to file the writ petition. All the important documents filed along with the writ petition are officials communications between the institute, the person concerned, namely respondent no.6, and the University and it is not known as to how the petitioner received these documents. We are convinced that the petitioner has been planted by some vested interest and the petition is not in public interest but it is to satisfy the vested interest of persons working in the institute or University.
Taking note of all these factors, we are not inclined to interfere into the matter at the instance of the petitioner. The petition stands dismissed.
(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) K.C.jha/- U