Ajit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22697 of 2013 =========================================================== Ajit Kumar Son Of Late Satya Narayan Choudhary Resident Of Village- Pipradih, P.O.- Morama, P.S.- Rajoun, District- Banka .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through The Commissioner-Cum-Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna

2. Deputy Secretary, Rural Development Department,' Government of Bihar, Patna

3. Joint Director (Industry), Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

4. The District Magistrate, Begusarai, District- Begusarai

5. The Deputy Collector, Land Reform, Ballia, Begusarai, District- Begusarai

6. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Begusarai, District- Begusarai

7. The Block Development Officer Ballia, Block Ballia, Begusarai, DistrictBegusarai

8. The Programme Officer, Ballia, Block Ballia, Begusarai, District- Begusarai .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. DHANANJAY KUMAR GUPTA For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 04-07-2016 Heard the counsel for the petitioner.

No one appears on behalf of the respondents-State. The communication dated 19.12.2011 issued by the respondent-Land Reform Deputy Collector Balia to the District Magistrate in connection with the allegations leveled against the petitioner has been challenged. During relevant time, the petitioner was functioning as Junior Engineer, in the District-Begusarai, Department of Rural Development. Several schemes were taken up by him under NREGA Yojna, and faces allegation pertaining to

Patna High Court CWJC No.22697 of 2013 dt.04-07-2016 2/2 execution of diverse projects/schemes under NREGA Yojna. On the basis of inquiry made into those allegations, indisputably, an order dismissing/terminating the petitioner from services has been passed in the year 2014.

The counsel for the petitioner has stated that aggrieved by the aforesaid order, a separate writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 9300 of 2014 has been filed by the petitioner.

Considering the above, in my view, the present writ application has lost its relevance. All issues connected with the order passed against the petitioner can be raised by him in the pending writ petition, challenging his dismissal/termination from service.

The writ application is disposed of.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) rohit/- U