Patna High CourtCWJC/10601/2007dismissed

Laxman Thakur v. The Commissioner Cum C.E.O.,Pa

2017-09-14Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10601 of 2007 =========================================================== Laxman Thakur son of late Sukar Thakur, resident of Mohalla- Harnaha Tola, Devi Asthan, Patna City, Police Station- Chauk, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Commissioner Cum Chief Executive Officer, Patna Nagar Nigam, Patna

2. Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Patna Nagar Nigam, Patna

3. Executive Engineer, Patna Nagar Nigam, Patna City Anchal, Patna. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Advocate. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 14-09-2017 The present petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to give the pay scale of Electric Wireman to the petitioner and further to make payment of arrear amount of difference salary and allowance on the basis of scale of Wireman and also make payment of other admissible benefits to the petitioner.

2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite repeated calls.

3. It would appear that even earlier this matter had been dismissed for non-prosecution by order dated 06.02.2014. The matter was subsequently restored by order dated 23.07.2014 in MJC No. 1779 of 2014 and once again it was dismissed for non-prosecution by order dated 11.09.2014.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent Corporation

Patna High Court CWJC No.10601 of 2007 dt.14-09-2017 submits that no relief ought to be granted by this Court as the petitioner has not been diligently prosecuting the matter. In any event, it is submitted that the Municipal Commissioner is the competent authority to look into the grievances of the petitioner.

5. It appears from the writ petition that the petitioner had already approached the authorities with representations dated 02.04.2007 and 05.05.07 (Annexures 5 and 6) for redressal of his grievances. Keeping the track record of the petitioner and in view of lack of interest shown in prosecuting the matter before this Court, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition accordingly stands dismissed.

Md. Ibrarul/Chandran (Vikash Jain, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 15 .09.2017 Transmission Date N.A.