Patna High CourtL.P.A/2067/2016dismissed

Ali Ahmad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-12-08The Chief Justice,Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.2067 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14477 of 2014 ====================================================== Ali Ahmad, Son of late Abdul Samar, resident of Mohalla- Anwar Colony, Danbad, Umar Dargah Lane Jalla Gali, Near Nityanand Ke Kuan, P.S.- Khajekaln, District- Patna.

.... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Bihar.

3. The Patna Municipal Corporation through its Municipal Secretary, Bihar, Patna.

4. The Municipal Commissioner, Patna.

5. The Additional Municipal Commissioner (Establishment) Patna, Municipal Corporation, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Mouar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Yogendra Prasad Sinha, AAG- 7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 08-12-2017 In the matter of disengagement of the petitioner, a daily wages employee, after his appointment in the year 1989 and disengagement in the year 2011, the learned Writ Court has refused to interfere into the matter on account of the fact that petitioner was only a daily wages employee appointed on contract basis and there was no relationship of employee and the employer in the real sense.

2. Finding no case made out for reinstatement of such employee after disengagement in the year 2011, the writ petition

Patna High Court LPA No.2067 of 2016 (4) dt.08-12-2017 2/2 was dismissed. In doing so, no error has been committed by the Writ Court warranting reconsideration.

3. In case, the writ petitioner seeks appointment afresh in pursuance of any recruitment process held, at best, the petitioner may seek age relaxation for the work done by him.

4. With the aforesaid, the appeal stands dismissed. (Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Uday/- U