Shrawan Harijan @ Shrawan Kumar Harijan @ Shrawan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1590 of 2013 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10966 of 2007 =========================================================== Shrawan Harijan @ Shrawan Kumar Harijan @ Shrawan Kumar Son Of Shri Mahadeo Harijan Ex-Rearer, Office Of Supervisor, State Tasar Farm, Karjhouse, P.S. Karjhouse, District Banka Resident Of Village Babupur, P.S. Sabour, District Bhagalpur .... .... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through Industrial Development Commissioner, Deptt. Of Handloom & Sericulture Industry, Bihar, Patna
2. The Director (Woms And Sericulture) Department Of Industry, Bihar, Patna
3. The Joint Director (Marketing) Directorate Of Handlooms And Sericulture Deptt. Of Industry Bihar, Patna
4. The Assistant Director Of Industry , Sericulture, Bhagalpur
5. The Supervisor, State Tasar Farm, Department Of Industry (Sericulture) Centre Karjhouse, P.S. Katoria, District Banka .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Namrta Mishra, GA-6 Mr. Alok Ranjan, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 02-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the respondents.
The Court is not satisfied with the reasons given for condonation of delay of 340 days.
In view of the same, limitation petition, which is I. A. No. 8727 of 2013, is required to be dismissed.
Even otherwise the Court went through the order of the
Patna High Court LPA No.1590 of 2013 dt.02-03-2017 2/2 Learned Single Judge to verify the authenticity of the appeal. From reading of the order impugned, it seems that the appellant supposedly last worked as daily-wager in the year 1991 or 1994. Somebody, who had been disengaged decades ago, cannot be allowed to be regularized at such belated hour and that was the reason for rejection of the writ application and refusal to pass any direction by the Learned Single Judge.
Even appeal has no merit. Therefore, it is dismissed, along with the limitation petition.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) SKM/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE Uploading Date 06.03.2017 Transmission Date