← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/23355/2018disposed

Dhananjay Prasad Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2019-10-17Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23355 of 2018 ====================================================== Dhananjay Prasad Ram, Son of Shri Thakur Prasad, R/o Village- Hundry, P.O. Nauhatta, P.S. Belwan, District- Kaimur at Bhabhua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna 3.

The District Education Officer, Rohtas 4.

Zila Parishad Rohtas through its Chief Executive Officer 5.

The D.D.C.-cum-the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Rohtas ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, AC to AAG-15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 17-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ application is payment of salary for the period March 2017 to June, 2018, during which period the petitioner was kept out of employment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the order of the State Appellate Authority, the petitioner was offered fresh appointment, instead of reinstatement and as such he has not been granted the benefit of continuity of service for the period March 2017 to June, 2018 and subsequently denied

Patna High Court CWJC No.23355 of 2018(2) dt.17-10-2019 2/2 salary for the aforesaid period.

Since the State Appellate Authority has accepted the contention of the petitioner and based on the decision of the State Appellate Authority, the petitioner has been appointed, the respondents are directed to adopt corrective measures by treating the fresh appointment as reinstatement of the petitioner and count the period i.e. March 2017 to June, 2018 as continuity in service with all consequential benefits.

Necessary corrective measures in this regard must be taken by the respondents at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days 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) uday/- U