Umesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17031 of 2017 ====================================================== Umesh Yadav, Son of Mungalal Yadav, resident of Village- Daprakha, P.S.- Triveniganj, District- Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

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

3.

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Supaul.

4.

The District Magistrate, Supaul.

5.

The Deputy Collector (Establishment), Supaul. 6.

The Sub- Divisional Officer, Triveniganj, Supaul. 7.

The District Selection Committee through its Chairman-cum- District Magistrate, Supaul.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N. K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ujjawal Bhushan, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Manish Kumar - GP-4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 19-03-2021 Heard Mr. N. K. Agrawal, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the AC to GP-4 on behalf of the State. Mr. N. K. Agrawal, learned senior counsel submits that in identical facts situation this Court has already disposed of C.W.J.C. No. 16066 of 2017 vide oral order dated 22.02.2021. In order to maintain consistency, the present writ application is also disposed of similar terms. The order dated 22.02.2021 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 16066 of 2017 is quoted below for ready reference:

Patna High Court CWJC No.17031 of 2017(4) dt.19-03-2021 2/2 "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim of the petitioner was not considered in right perspective. He submits that the petitioner may be granted liberty to approach the District Magistrate, Supaul where he will highlight the decision of this Court to contend that he deserves to be considered against category-C, according to schedule-C.

Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the writ application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach respondent no. 4 (District Magistrate, Supaul) who shall examine the claim of the petitioner appropriately in accordance with law.

Necessary decision in this regard must be taken by the respondent no.4 within a maximum period of six months from the date of receipt of representation along with a copy of this order."

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) uday/- U