Patna High CourtCWJC/16266/2007dismissed

Rabindra Nath Chaturvedi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-03-02Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16266 of 2007 ====================================================== Rabindra Nath Chaturvedi, son of Late Shiv Shankar Chaturvedi, resident of village and P.O. - Bambahar, P.S. - Piro, District - Bhojpur (Arrah) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna

3. the Secretary, Rural Development Department, Bihar, Patna

4. the District Magistrate, bhojpur, Arrah

5. The Executive Engineer, national Rural Employment Programme, Bhojpur (Arrah) .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Tiwary For the Respondent/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to AAG No. 10.

The petitioner, who claims to continued as Daily Wager from 7.3.1989 and till 18.10.1989 and thereafter, again engaged on 4.4.1990 and continued as Daily Wager up to 1993, has primarily made a prayer for regularization of his service on the post of Assistant in the office of Executive Engineer, National Rural Employment Programme, Bhojpur. Learned counsel for the petitioner accepts that for the same relief the petitioner had approached this court by way of filing a writ petition vide CWJC No.7380 of 1995, which was disposed of on 28.11.1996.

Patna High Court CWJC No.16266 of 2007 (4) dt.02-03-2015 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ofcourse in the said writ petition no specific relief was granted, however, the court had observed that if vacancy is advertised for appointment, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file application for appointment.

I have perused the order i.e. Annexure - 5 to the writ petition passed by a bench of this court. On examining the order of the writ court, the court is satisfied that earlier for the same relief no positive order was passed in favour of the petitioner. Keeping in view the earlier order as well as the relief sought for in the writ petition for regularization, the court is of the opinion that no relief can be granted to the petitioner. The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U