Binay Kumar Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18352 of 2014 ====================================================== Binay Kumar Sinha Son of Late Maheshwar Prasad Sinha Resident of Mohalla - Panka toli, P.O. Ramna, P.S. Kazi Mohammadpur, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Inspector General Prison, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.

The Under Secretary, Home Special Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur 5.

The Superintendent of New Sahid Khudiram Bose, Central Jail, Muzaffarpur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Ms. Kumari Amrita, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 20.08.2013 passed by the Respondent No. 1 by which the claim of the petitioner for grant of J.P. Samman Pension Yojana has been refused on the ground that no document is available with the authority concerned.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the petitioner has been moved before this Hon'ble Court in CWJC No. 11316 of 2012 and the same was disposed of vide order dated 29.04.2013 with the direction to the petitioner to approach the authority and in compliance of the order dated 29.04.2013, the petitioner has approached the authority concerned annexing all the relevant documents supporting his

Patna High Court CWJC No.18352 of 2014(6) dt.06-02-2025 2/2 claim for grant of J.P. Samman Pension Scheme. But it appears from the impugned order dated 20.08.2013 that the authority has not considered the documents submitted by the petitioner and rejected his claim. He further submits that from perusal of the order dated 20.08.2013 it appears that even the authority has not mentioned anywhere in its order that whether any document has been submitted by the petitioner and without considering the same the claim of the petitioner has been rejected by the authority concerned.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has filed a counter affidavit stating therein that the record is not available with the jail authority.

5. In view of the aforesaid, the order dated 20.08.2013 (Annexure-12) is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Respondent No. 1 to take a fresh decision after considering Annexures 1 to 5 of the writ petition within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U