Parmila Kumari @ Parmila Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.540 of 2017 ====================================================== Parmila Kumari @ Parmila Devi, W/o Umesh Das, resident of village - Pakaulia, P.S. - Akilpur, District - Saran.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Old Secretariate, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate Chhapra at Saran.

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer at Sonepur, District - Saran.

4. The Block Development Officer at Dighwara Block, District - Saran.

5. Nitu Kumari, W/o Mahadeo Das, resident of Village - Pakaulia, P.O. - Ganghara, P.S. - Akilpur, District - Saran.

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Sinha, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manish Kumar, AC to AAG6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 30-06-2017 Leave is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner to correct the status of respondent no.3 in the pleading of the Court as well as in the pleadings of the State during the course of the day.

Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Manish Kumar, AC to AAG-6, for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the selection of the private respondent on the post of Vikas Mitra and the reason assigned by the petitioner is that the appointment has been secured by forged document.

Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner, in reference to the notice issued from the office of the Sub-divisional Officer,

Patna High Court CWJC No.540 of 2017 (4) dt.30-06-2017 Sonepur, Saran has submitted that a complaint in this regard has been filed by the petitioner and has also been acted upon as is apparent from Annexure 9 to the supplementary affidavit, whereby despite notice being issued by the Sub-divisional Officer, Sonepur, Saran to the private respondent, she has not bothered to respond to the notice.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that since the matter is yet pending consideration at the stage of Sub-divisional Officer, Sonepur, District Saran, ends of justice would be subserved with the direction to the Sub-divisional Officer, Sonepur, Saran to dispose of the complaint so filed by the petitioner in accordance with law and with due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the private respondent. Since it is a case of public appointment, the Sub-divisional Officer, Sonepur is well advised to dispose of the complaint expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.

With the aforementioned observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Jyoti Saran, J) Surendra/- U