Patna High CourtL.P.A/1398/2014dismissed

Digambar Prasad Verma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-08-03The Chief Justice,Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1398 of 2014 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9630 of 2013 =========================================================== Digambar Prasad Verma, Son of Late Janki Prasad, Resident of Village : Pamra, P.S. : Sitamarhi, P.O. : Bakhri, District : Sitamarhi .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The Engineer-in-Chief (North), Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

4. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Samastipur Zone, Samastipur, Patna

5. The Superintending Engineer, Flood Control Circle, Khagaria, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

6. The District Magistrate, Khagaria

7. The Executive Engineer, Flood Control Division No. 2, Khagaria

8. The Executive Engineer, Flood Control Division, Naugachhia .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurendra Kumar, A.C. to G.P. 5 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 03-08-2017 None appears on behalf of the appellant. None had appeared on the last two dates also.

The writ petition in question was filed seeking regularization in service in the year 2013 and the Writ Court found that the appellant was removed from service after he was disengaged on 31.03.1984 and after such a long period of time there is no

Patna High Court LPA No.1398 of 2014 dt.03-08-2017 2/2 question of considering his case for regularization. From the counter affidavit filed by the respondents also, as is evident from the averments made from Paragraph 14 onwards, it is clear that the appellant worked only up to 01.03.1984 and thereafter he was not working and the contention that appellant is still working has been rebutted.

That being so, we se no error in the order passed by the learned Writ Court warranting reconsideration. The Letters Patent Appeal stands dismissed.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) P.K.P.

AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 08.08.2017 Transmission Date