Pushpa Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 14112 of 2014 ====================================================== Pushpa Kumari, aged about 34 years, W/o Ramesh Kumar Suman, Child Development Officer, Block - Kalyanpur, PS - Belhar, Dist - East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Special Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, I.C.D.S., Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 5.

The Divisional Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger. 6.

The Joint Secretary (Establishment), Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

7.

The District Magistrate, Jamui.

8.

The District Magistrate, East Champaran.

9.

The District Programme Officer, Jamui.

10.

The District Programme Officer, East Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Sc6- M.K.Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 20-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-State.

Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of punishment contained in Memo No 2438 dated 27.05.2013 whereby she has been demoted to her basic pay scale.

Mr Rajeev Kumar Singh appearing for the petitioner submits that the proceedings has been conducted ignoring the procedural requirements and order of punishment is unsustainable in the eyes of law. The infirmities in the proceedings have been highlighted by the petitioner before the

Patna High Court CWJC No.14112 of 2014(2) dt.20-08-2019 2/2 Appellate Authority in the Communication dated 14.08.2013 (Annexure 7).

Learned counsel for the State submits that the application is not on format. The petitioner should be required to file an appeal on appropriate format for consideration. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the issues have been raised by the petitioner in the Communication dated 14.08.2013 filed before respondent No 1, i e, the Appellate Authority.

This Court is not impressed by the objection raised by the State regarding the appeal not being on format. The Authority, namely, respondent No 1 should treat the petitioner's Communication dated 14.08.2013 as an appeal against the order dated 27.05.2013 and consider the same and dispose it of by reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

Writ petition stands disposed of.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U