Paras Nath Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2166 of 2023 ====================================================== Paras Nath Pandey son of Ram Sakal Pandey, resident of Village- Madhaul, P.O. Susta, P.S. Kudhani, District- Muzaffarpur, presently working as Lab Incharge, Department of Chemistry, Ram Dayalu Singh College, Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director Higher Education, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur through the Registrar.

5.

The Vice Chancellor, Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur.

6.

The Registrar, Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur.

7.

The Finance Officer, Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur.

8.

The Principal, Ram Dayalu Singh College, Muzaffarpur, DistrictMuzaffarpur. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Madan Jeet Kumar ( GP- 20 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 31-07-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner would be covered by the ratio of the judgment of this Court in L.P.A. No. 1491 of 2012 decided on 22.01.2016 and CWJC No. 7473 of 2010.

2. In Paragraph '21' of the writ application a statement has been made that Rule 4 C (1) of the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Litigation

Patna High Court CWJC No.2166 of 2023(2) dt.31-07-2023 2/2 Policy, 2011') provides that in case the claim is covered by any decision of the Court then it may also be considered and disposed of at the level of the department itself without compelling the litigant to come to the Court.

3. Although a statement in light of the litigation policy has been made but on perusal of the writ application it does not appear that the petitioner has made any representation to the department under the Litigation Policy, 2011.

4. Learned counsel for the State and the Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University are present.

5. In the given facts and circumstance of the case, if so advised, the petitioner may seek his remedy before the Department under the Litigation Policy, 2011 and in case, any such remedy is applied for the same will be considered in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case and this order alone would not give rise to any cause of action.

6. This application stands disposed of.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) tusharika/- U