Patna High CourtC. REV./321/2016dismissed

The Union Of India Through The Secretary And ORS. v. Radha Raman Choudhary

2016-10-04Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Navaniti Prasad Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.321 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3013 of 2014 ======================================================

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Posts, New Delhi Cum the Director General, Department of Posts, New Delhi 110001

2. The Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, G.P.O. Complex, Patna 800001

3. The Post Master General, Northern Region, Muzaffarpur

4. The Superintendent of Post Polices, Purnea Division, Purnea

5. The Director of Accounts (Postal), Patna 800001 .... .... Petitioners

Versus

Radha Raman Choudhary S/o Late Janardan Prasad Choudhary, Ex - Postal Assistant, Purnea H.O., Resident of village & P.O. Singhia, Via Purnea Chowk, District - Purnea .... .... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar(ASG) For the Respondent/s : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH And HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH) 4.

04-10-2016 We have considered the fact that the writ petitioner had given his consent for being considered for absorption in service in February, 1995. Ordinarily DPC should have been held immediately which was not so held. It got delayed by more than one and half years, ultimately, when writ petitioner was absorbed, the service tenure was four months short of ten years, which could have entitled him to pension. After consideration that the delay was on the part of DPC, we disagreed with the

Patna High Court C. REV. No.321 of 2016 (4) dt.04-10-2016 judgment of the Tribunal and held that it was a fit case, in which, the delay, not being attributable to the petitioner, ought to be condoned. We see no reason to review our order aforesaid.

This application for review is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.) (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajeev/- U