Dilip Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1569 of 2016 =========================================================== Dilip Kumar, S/o Late Gichha Singh, R/o Village- Simridih, P.S. Warsaliganj, District Nawada.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya, Bihar.

4. The District Magistrate, Nawada.

5. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Nawada.

6. The Deputy Collector Najarat, Nawada.

7. The Deputy Collector (Establishment) Nawada.

8. The District Welfare Officer, Nawada.

9. The District Transport Officer Nawada.

10. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Muzaffarpur Sadar.

11. The Block Development Officer, Warsaliganj. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, Adv. Md. Kamaluddin, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Ms. Shilpa Singh, GA-12 Ms. Abhanjalli, AC to GA-12 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 18-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner, inter alia, prays for a direction to the respondents including District Magistrate, Nawada to include his name in the district panel prepared for appointment on 4th grade employees.

According to the petitioner, he is working on daily wages since 1998 in the office of the Block Development Officer, Warsaliganj. It is also the case of the petitioner that a panel was

Patna High Court CWJC No.1569 of 2016 dt.18-10-2017 prepared on 16.3.2002 in which his name appeared at serial no. 223. It is stated that in the subsequent panel prepared in the year 2004 his name went missing and was never included till date. It is stated that in the meanwhile, process was initiated for regularization of daily wagers but since the name of the petitioner never figured in the panel that he alongwith others represented before the District Magistrate for inclusion of his name in the panel and for consequential regularization of his services, a copy of which is present at Annexure 13. It is the case of the petitioner that since nothing happened on the representation filed on 15.10.2015 that he is before this Court. A counter affidavit is filed and which in no manner deals with the issue raised, rather a letter of the District Magistrate, Nawadah is enclosed through which he has sought for age relaxation of the applicants seeking regularization.

Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, informs that the petitioner is within age and does not require age relaxation and thus, the counter affidavit is in a different context. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of grievance raised herein, I deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the District Magistrate, Nawadah to consider the representation of the petitioner, as contained in Annexure 13, and dispose of the same in accordance with law

Patna High Court CWJC No.1569 of 2016 dt.18-10-2017 within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (Jyoti Saran, J) Surendra/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 01.11.2017 Transmission Date NA