Anshu Ratan Bharti v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11058 of 2013 =========================================================== Anshu Ratan Bharti, Ex Panchayat Rozgar Sevak. Muriyari, Block- Mairwan, District - Siwan, Presently Residing at- Anshu Ratan Bharti, S/o- Sri Suresh Prasad Singh, R/Vill- Arms, P.O. - Arms, P.S. - Kajra, Distt - Lakhisarai .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate Cum District Program Convener, Siwan, Dist - Siwan

4. The Deputy Development Commissioner Cum Additional District Program Convener, Siwan, Distt - Siwan

5. Block Development Officer, Mairwan Block, District - Siwan .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma, AC to GA-3 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

The petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Rozgar Sevak of Gram Panchayat, Semra under Mairwa Block in the district of Siwan on 10.09.2007.

The employees of MANREGA went on strike from 27.05.2010 as against non-fulfillment of their 5 Sutri demand. The petitioner and many other similarly situated were terminated from service on 29.06.2010.

The case of the petitioner is that the demands were

Patna High Court CWJC No.11058 of 2013 dt.25-01-2016 2 / 2 small and legitimate and he and others had gone on peaceful strike. The very fact that the State Government has accepted some of the demands would establish that their demand was not illegitimate. A large number of such employees moved this Court with a large number of writ applications, which have been heard in C.W.J.C. No. 15219 of 2015 and its analogous cases. This Court after considering the matter in its entirety quashed the order of termination and directed them to be reinstated in service provided that they immediately report on duty within the time limit so fixed with a warning not to repeat such act in future and on other terms and conditions, which are incorporated in para 18 of the judgment, dated 06.10.2015, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 15219 of 2015, heard analogous with other writ applications.

I find that the case of the petitioner is substantially similar to the cases of petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 15219 of 2015 heard analogous with other writ applications. The impugned order of termination of the petitioner is set aside on the same terms and conditions as mentioned in the aforesaid judgment. This writ application is allowed.

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.) Uday/- U