Sanjay Kumar Patel And ORS. v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21893 of 2014 ====================================================== 1.

Sanjay Kumar Patel and Ors. Son of Late Lakshman Prasad resident of Gudari Gois Lal Chowk, Ward No. 9, P.S. and District - Bettiah West Champaran 2.

Kamlesh Kumar Prasad Son of Late Shambhu Ram resident of Pauni Bag Baswaiya, Ward No. 32, P.S. and District - Bettiah West Champaran , 3.

Ram Babu Kumar Son of Sri Babu Lal Prasad resident of Kali Bag Ward No.3, P.S. and District Bettiah West Champaran 4.

Pawan Kumar Son of Nagina Prasad resident of Mohalla - Kali Bag Ward No. 4, P.S. and District Bettiah West Champaran 5.

Raju Kumar Son of Sri Shiv Pujan Sah resident of Naya Bazar Harimath School Ward No. 11, P.S. and District - Bettiah West Champaran 6.

Deep Narayan Kumar Son of Sri Babu Lal Prasad resident of Kali Bag Ward No.3, P.S. and District Bettiah West Champaran 7.

Md. Jakir @ Md. Jakir Mansuri Son of Late Mahmood Alam resident of village - Baswariya, Ward No. 28, P.S. and District - Bettiah West Champaran 8.

Akhtar Miyan Son of Latiphul Rahman resident of Najni Chowk Ganj No. 2, Ward No. 18, P.S. and District - Bettiah West Champaran 9.

Lallan Prasad Gupta Son of Late Ramjee Prasad resident of village - Purani Gudri Turha Toli Ward No. 10, P.S. and District - Bettiah West Champaran 10.

Sachin Kumar Son of Sri Brij Kishore Prasad resident of village - Kargahiya, Registrar Colony, P.S. Bettiah Nagar, District - Bettiah West Champaran 11.

Ram Chandra Malik Son of Late Bhantu Mali resident of village - Naurangh Bad, P.S. Nagar Bettiah, District - Bettiah West Champaran 12.

Sanjay Mallik Son of Bindesari Mallik resident of village - Naurangh Bad, P.S. Nagar Bettiah, District - Bettiah West Champaran 13.

Mumtaz Alam Son of Gama Miyan resident of Mohalla - Dargah Krishyan Quarter, P.S. Nagar Bettiah, District - Bettiah West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Additinal Police Directorate General Special Branch, Bihar, Patna 3.

The Inspector General of Police Rescue , Bihar, Patna 4.

The Zonal Inspector General of Police, Patna 5.

The Divisional Commissioner, Patna 6.

The Regional Deputy Inspector General of Police, Patna 7.

The Inspector General of Police, Muzaffarpur Zone, Muzaffarpur 8.

The Deputy Inspector General of Police, West Champaran Region, Bettiah

Patna High Court CWJC No.21893 of 2014(2) dt.12-12-2022 2/3 9.

The District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah 10.

Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Bettiah 11.

The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Sadar, Bettiah 12.

The Officer in Charge, Bettiah Nagar Police Station, West Champaran ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gaurav Prakash, Adv. With Mr. Lalan Kumar, Adv. With Mr.Vibhakar Kumar For the State :

Mr.Gp11- Awanish Nandan Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 12-12-2022

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioners by way of this writ petition has prayed for allowing him honorarium along with the interest for the work which they have performed. The post of S.P.O. (Special Police Officer) has been coined by the Police Department and persons were appointed as S.P.Os. giving them a certain amount as honorarium.

3. Learned counsel for the State submits that initially 360 Special Police Officers were directed to be appointed in District Bettiah vide his letter dated 19.01.2012. Special Police Officer was to be appointed after recommendation from the concerned S.H.O. and on the said basis 90 S.P.Os were selected. Several of them performed good work and their services were continued.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners admits that the

Patna High Court CWJC No.21893 of 2014(2) dt.12-12-2022 3/3 petitioners were not continued and the sole claim now is with regard to the honorarium for the period they have worked. In writ jurisdiction this Court is not going to decide the factual matters which are based purely on proof. The respondents in the reply have not admitted the claim of the petitioners.

5. In the circumstances, leaving it open for the petitioners to avail the remedy before the concerned Civil Court, this writ petition is dismissed.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Pravinkumar/- Item No. 34 U