Umesh Chandra Patel v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2031 of 2016 ====================================================== Umesh Chandra Patel Son of Late Ram Pukar Patel Resident of Mohalla - Bagmali, Ward No. 05, Police Station Hajipur Town in the District of Vaishali Presently Secretary, Local Body Employee Fedaration, Nagar Parishad, Hajipur in the District of Vaishali ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
3. The Additional Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
4. The Deputy Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
5. The District Magistrate Cum - Collector, Vaishali at Hajipur
6. The Nagar Parishad, Hajipur through its Chairman
7. The Chairman, Nagar Parishad, Hajipur in the district of Vaishali
8. The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Hajipur in the district of Vaishali ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sunil Kumar Mr. Navin Sharma For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Mahtab Alam, C to SC 20 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 30-01-2019 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent State.
For grant of benefits of the recommendation of the 6th Pay Revision Committee with effect from 1.1.1996 in stead of 1.10.2011,the petitioner, who is an employee of Nagar Parishad, Hajipur, has made a representation before respondent No. 8. It is submitted that if the respondent No. 8 is directed to dispose of the representation, grievance of the petitioner is likely to be
Patna High Court CWJC No.2031 of 2016(2) dt.30-01-2019 2/2 redressed.
Since the issue of grant of the said scale with effect from the date as prayed by the petitioner's Counsel is yet to be considered by respondent No. 8, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the instant proceeding pending. The writ petition is dismissed.
Respondent No. 8 should take a final decision on the claim of the petitioner made by Annexure 3 dated 16.6.2015 expeditiously.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U