Nagendra Prasad Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.341 of 2019 ====================================================== 1.
Nagendra Prasad Singh and Ors Son of Yatra Prasad Singh, Resident of Atapur, P.S.- Hasanpur Road, District- Samastipur. 2.
Krishna Chaudhary, Son of Late Jhalli Chaudhary, Resident of MohallaKhajpura, P.S.- Hawai Adda, District- Patna. 3.
Dinesh Jha, Son of Late Gunanand Jha, Resident of Village- Bishanpur, P.S.- Basuara, District- Darbhanga.
4.
Sunita Devi, Wife of Ramanand Jha, Resident of Village- Jorabarpur Panchath, P.S.- Beldaur, District- Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources , Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Secretary, Department of Water Resources , Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.
The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Special Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4.
The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Birpur Division, DistrictSupaul. 5.
The Superintending Engineer, Canal Circle, Saharsa. 6.
The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Water Resources Department, Birpur, Supaul.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pramod Mishra For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Deepak Sahay Jamuar, AC to- Aag4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 18-07-2019 Petitioners allege discrimination in the matter of grant of promotion from the post of Work Sarkar to Supervisor Grade I. It is their specific case, referring to some persons named in para 11 and 13 of the writ petition, that they are juniors to the petitioners and have been promoted as Supervisor Grade I ignoring petitioners' legitimate claim.
Patna High Court CWJC No.341 of 2019(4) dt.18-07-2019 2/2 Respondents in the counter affidavit have not specifically denied the averments of the writ petitioners. However, the persons against whom the petitioners are claiming discrimination are not before this Court.
In the circumstances, Counsel for the petitioners submits that he would be claiming promotion as Supervisor Grade I before respondent No. 4 having regard to the same granted to juniors to the petitioners.
In view of said submission and since consideration now has to be done by the authorities themselves the writ petition need not be kept pending. The petitioners are permitted to move respondent No. 4 by making a representation. If the same is filed within four weeks, respondent No. 4 should consider the same and dispose it of by a reasoned and speaking order within three months thereafter.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U