Kameshwar Chaubey v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 5423 of 2016 ====================================================== Kameshwar Chaubey, son of late Ram Bilash Chaubey, Resident of Village - Jaitpura, PO + PS - Noan, District - Kaimur, Bhabhua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1 The State Of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna 2 Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3 Engineer-in-Chief (South Bihar), Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 4 Chief Engineer (Mechanical), Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 5 Chief Engineer, Dehri Range, Water Resources Department, Dehri-onSone, Gaya 6 Superintending Engineer, Water Resources Department, Irrigation, Mechanical Division, Mohania, Kaimur 7 Sub Divisional Officer, Water Resources Department, Irrigation, Mechanical Division, Mohania, Kaimur 8 Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Irrigation, Mechanical Division, Mohania, Kaimur 9 Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department, Circle Office, Dehri-onSone, Gaya ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Dr Pankaj, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr Mrigender Kumar, AC to GP XX ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 14-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent State.

Placing reliance upon Resolution of the State Government dated 16.03.2006, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his claim for regularization was required to be considered by the respondents pursuant to his application (Annexure 8 of the writ petition).

In view of the limited submission, and since no

Patna High Court CWJC No.5423 of 2016(2) dt.14-11-2019 2/2 adjudication is required, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No 8 to consider the petitioner's claim and dispose it of by reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the claim made by the petitioner. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U