Pankaj Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16936 of 2017 ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar Singh, S/o Late Ram jee Singh, resident of Village+ PostKathar, P.S. Krishna Braham, District- Buxar, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Cum Commissioner, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Joint Secretary Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Primary Education, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Education Officer, Buxar.

5. The District Program Officer (Establishment), Buxar.

6. The Block Development Officer, Brahmpur, Buxar.

7. The Block Education Officer, Brahmpur, Buxar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Apurv Harsh AC to SC28 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 24-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejariwal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is covered by the decision of this Court dated 13.10.2017 passed in CWJC No. 12725 of 2017 and 11.9.2017 passed in CWJC No. 11784 of 2017.

Counsel for the State submits that in the absence of instruction he is not in a position to admit whether the case is covered by those judgments or not.

After hearing the parties, the Court is of the view that there

Patna High Court CWJC No.16936 of 2017(2) dt.24-11-2017 2/2 is no point to keep the matter pending if the case is covered by those two decisions on which counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Respondent No. 3, Director, Primary Education, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna to consider the case of the petitioner and if it is found that the case of the petitioner is identical to the case of the petitioners of CWJC Nos. 12725 and 11784 of 2017, the Respondent No. 3 will extend similar benefits to the petitioner and in case he does not find any similarity in the case of the petitioners of those cases, in that situation, the Respondent No. 3 is required to give reason for distinguishing the case on facts. All the exercise shall be undertaken by the respondent No. 3 within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

With the aforesaid, the writ application stands disposed of. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) spandey/- U