Vijay Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17529 of 2010 ====================================================== Vijay Sharma S/O Late Baijnath Sharma R/O Vill.- Neora, P.S.- Bihta, Distt.- Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest Government Of Bihar, Patna

3. Deputy Director Bihar State Forest Development Corporation Ltd., Patliputra Colony, Patna-13

4. Managing Director Bihar State Forest Development Corporation Ltd., Patna-13

5. General Manager, Minor Forest Produce Project Circle, Patna

6. Chief Soil Conservator, Patliputra Colony, Patna-13

7. Divisional Forest Officer Punpun Soil Conservation Division, Aurangabad

8. Divisional Manager Minor Forest Produce Project, Gaya Divison, Gaya

9. Divisional Manager Minor Forest Produce Project, Sasaram Division, Sasaram

10. Range Officer Minor Forest Produce Project, Sasaram Range, Sasaram .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kr.Jha-2 For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Ga9) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 20-06-2018 It appears from perusal of the averments made in the writ petition that the petitioner was working as a daily wage labourer under the Divisional Forest Officer, Punpun Soil Conservation Division, Aurangabad and from time to time he was engaged purely on daily wage. Thereafter, the Range Officer of Minor Forest Produce Project, Sasaram Range, Sasaram by letter No.9 dated 19.2.1996 had directed for removal of the petitioner from the work after giving him one month notice. Whereafter, the

Patna High Court CWJC No.17529 of 2010 (2) dt.20-06-2018 2/2 petitioner was disengaged.

The petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 10.8.1995 assailing the aforesaid order of disengagement of the petitioner from the service as daily wager as well as praying for regularization of his services, however, the said writ petition was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 23/2/2006.

Now, the petitioner has again approached this Court with a prayer to direct the respondents to reinstate him in service as well as for regularization of his services. The present writ petition is clearly barred by the principles of res judicata and constructive res judicata inasmuch as for the same and similar reliefs, as prayed in the present writ petition, the petitioner had earlier approached this Court but the writ petition so filed by the petitioner had stood dismissed. In view of the aforesaid, there is no merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) BTiwary/- U