Om Prakash Bharti @ Om Prakash Paswan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15197 of 2015 ====================================================== Om Prakash Bharti @ Om Prakash Paswan so of Late Ram Lagan Paswan, resident of village & P.O. Riga station Tola, P.S. Riga, District- Sitamarhi, Bihar PIN CODE-843327 .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Patna.

2. The Department of Human Resources Development State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.

4. The District Programme Officer (Literacy) Sitamarhi at Sitamarhi.

5. Chairman (Pramukh) Panchayat Samiti Riga-cum-Chairman, Lok Siksha Samittee-cum- Chairman Selection Committee at Riga, District- Sitamarhi

6. Block Education Officer, Riga Block, P.S. Riga District- Sitamarhi.

7. K.R.P. Riga Block, Mukhmantri Akshar Anchal Yojana Member Secretary, Block + P.S.- Riga, District- Sitamarhi.

8. Audit expert (Lekha Visheshajn) Block office Riga at Riga, DistrictSitamarhi.

9. The Headmaster-cum-Ex officer Member of the Selection Committee Middle School Riga Sugar Mill, P.S. & Block- Riga, District- Sitamarhi.

10. Govind Ram S/o Late Vaskit Ram, resident of Village- Sangram Phandah, P.O.- Riga, P.S.-District- Sitamarhi- 843327. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bindeshwar Sah, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Smt. Binita Singh- Gp31 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner was holding out and out a contractual engagement in the National Literacy Mission and his such appointment was sought to be made by B.E.O. Rega, by order dated 26.02.2013, which came to an end in view of the order of

Patna High Court CWJC No.15197 of 2015 (2) dt.01-10-2015 the District Programme Officer, Sitamarhi dated 26.03.2013, which order also has not been brought on record by learned counsel for the petitoiner, this Court would not be inclined to interfere with the consequential order passed by the B.E.O., Rega, dated 10.04.2013 primarily on the ground of delay and also on account of the impugned order dated 26.03.2013, being not even brought on record, much less, assailed by the petitioner. At the end of the day, if the petitioner having contractual engagement had fixed stipend of Rs. 3000 per month was satisfied as with regard to his termination for a period of more than two years and has filed this writ application on 21.09.2015, he must now face the consequence of such delay.

That being so, this application is dismissed only on the ground of delay and laches.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Ranjan/- U