Md. Jahir v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.176 of 2014 ====================================================== Md. Jahir Son Of Late Abdul Aziz Resident Of Ward No. 17, Nagar Parishad, Supaul, Police Station And District- Supaul .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary, Deptt. Of Urban Development And Housing, Government Of Bihar, Patna
3. The Principal Secretary, Deptt. Of Personnel And Administrative Reform, Government Of Bihar, Patna
4. The Principal Secretary, Deptt. Of General Administrative Government Of Bihar, Patna
5. The Divisional Commissioner, Koshi Pramandal, Saharsa
6. The Collector, Supaul
7. The District Treasury Officer, Supaul
8. The Executive Engineer, Nagar Parishad, Supaul
9. Amrendra Kumar Yadav Son Of Late Shiv Nandan Yadav Resident Of Mohalla- Ward No. 4, Nagar Parishad, Supaul, Police Station And DistrictSupaul
10. Kishore Kumar Yadav Son Of Krishna Jeevan Yadav Resident Of Mohalla Ward No.- 15, Supaul Nagar Parishad, Police Station And DistrictSupaul
11. Arun Kumar Raut Son Of Sri Gopal Raut Resident Of Mohalla Ward No.- 25, Supaul
12. Md. Mustafa Son Of Late Md. Moin Resident Of Mohalla Ward No.- 22, Supaul Nagar Parishad, Police Station And District- Supaul .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mallick, Adv For the State : Mr. Madhukar Krishna Sinha SC-1 For the Respondent No.8: Mr. Dr. Amitesh Kumar, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT 08-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The moment this Court would find that the petitioner is a Social Worker and not qualified for the post of Junior Engineer, Tax Daroga, Safai Zamadar and
Patna High Court CWJC No.176 of 2014 (3) dt.08-04-2015 Bijli Mistry, the post held by respondent nos. 9 to 12, it will have no other option but to hold that the present writ application is not maintainable.
It is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Ranjan/- U