Patna High CourtCWJC/12622/2013disposed

Ajay Kumar Saha @ Ajay Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-10-20Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12622 of 2013 =========================================================== Ajay Kumar Saha @ Ajay Kumar Sah S/O Late Jiya Lal Sah Resident Of Telli Basti, P.S. & District - Kishanganj .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna

2. The District Collector/Magistrate, Kishanganj

3. The District Incharge Mid - Day Meal Project, Kishanganj

4. Deputy Collector/Magistrate Cum Incharge, Kishanganj

5. Block Development Officer Cum Block Supply Officer, Dighalbank, Kishanganj

6. Sub - Divisional Officer, Kishanganj

7. District Education Officer, Kishanganj

8. District Co - Ordinator Mid - Day Meal Project, Kishanganj .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Adv. Mr. Diwakar Sinha, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Deepak Sahay Jamuar, AC to AAG-4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 20-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is challenging the Advertisement No. 02/2013 published on 10.06.2013. As per claim of the petitioner, he was appointed on contract basis but during the contract period, a fresh advertisement has been published for fresh appointment on the contract basis again. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that during period of contract, there cannot be a fresh advertisement but, the handicap is that in the writ application, the period of contract

Patna High Court CWJC No.12622 of 2013 dt.20-10-2016 has not been mentioned nor the appointment letter is the part of the writ application.

In that view of the matter, it is very difficult to interfere with the action of the respondents. However, if already the selection process has been initiated and has not completed as yet, if the petitioner has applied again for the post, his case will be considered and appropriate benefit of his experience would be extended to him. With the aforementioned observation, this application is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Rishi/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 22.10.2016 Transmission Date