Dr. Girish Kumar Singh v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.935 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20645 of 2012 ====================================================== Dr. Girish Kumar Singh, Son of Sri Jagnnath Singh, Resident of B-55, Ashokpuri, P.O.- B.V. College, P.S.- Airport, Town- Patna, District- Patna, at present residing at 5/418, Poddar Colony, Sagar, M.P. Working as Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science & Applications, Dr. Harisingh Gour University, Sagar.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Higher Education, Government of India, New Delhi.3

2. The Vice- Chancellor, Central University of Bihar, B.I.T, Campus, P.O.:- B.V College, Patna.

3. The Registrar, Central University of Bihar, B.I.T, Campus, P.O-B.V College, Patna.

4. The Assistant Registrar, -1, Central University of Bihar, B.I.T, Campus, P.O.:- B.V College, Patna.

5. Jainath Yadav S/o Late Kashinath Yadav, Assistant Professor, Deptt. Of Computer Science, Central University of Bihar, BIT Campus, P.O. B.V.College, P.S. Airport, Distt. Patna- 800014 ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Vikash Kumar Mr Rajeev Shekhar For the Central University :

Mr. S.D Sanjay, Addl. S.G.

Ms Parul Prasad For Union of India :

Mr Anshay Bahadur Mathur, CGC For Respondent No.5 : Mr Alok Agrawal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) 23-11-2017 There is delay of 2 years and 147 days in preferring the appeal. The ground given is that a review application was preferred against the writ order.

The order of the Writ Court was passed on 15.07.2013.

Patna High Court LPA No.935 of 2016(8) dt.23-11-2017 2/2 This appeal has been preferred on 25.04.2016. The appellant stood removed from service while he was still in probation and the period of probation was terminated. The Court is further informed that in the year 2013 itself, the appellant has taken up employment in yet another University. In other words, these circumstances surely does not compel the Court to accept the explanations offered for delay in preferring this appeal after two years and 147 days.

The condonation application is dismissed. As a consequence, even the appeal stands dismissed. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) sk U