Madhav Kant Thakur v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3085 of 2017 ====================================================== Madhav Kant Thakur S/o Late Shri Nandan Thakur, R/o Village Laskari, P.O. Laskari, P.S. Udakishunganj, District-Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. BIhar, Patna. 3.

The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. Bihar, Patna 4.

The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Secretary-cum-Special Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 5.

The Chief Engineer Irrigation, Creation, Water Resources Department, Saharsa 6.

The District Magistrate, Purnia, District-Purnia 7.

The Superintedent Engineer, Canal Circle, District Purnia, 8.

The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Banmankhi, District, Purnia. 9.

The District Account Officer, Purnia District-Purnia. 10.

The Treasury Officer, Purnia, District-Purnia. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Vikash Kumar- SC-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 07-02-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned Counsel for the State.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Sub-ordinate Divisional Cashier- cum- Correspondent Clerk on 30.08.1971. However, the petitioner has not been granted any promotion since the date of his appointment, i.e., 30.08.1971. Counsel further submits that the petitioner superannuated from service on 31.07.2012

Patna High Court CWJC No.3085 of 2017(4) dt.07-02-2025 2/2 from the post of Account Clerk in the office of the Executive Engineer, irrigation Division, Banmakhi, District- Purnia. Counsel also submits that the petitioner filed an application/representation, annexed as Annexure- 2, for the grant of ACP, but no order has been passed on his representation till date.

3. Learned Counsel for the State submits that the service of the petitioner has to be guided according to the circular which has been annexed in the counter-affidavit. However, he admits that, based on the pleadings, there is no averment that whether any decision has been made on Annexure- 2 at the relevant level or not.

4. In this background, the writ petition is disposed off with a direction to the Chief Engineer Irrigation, Creation, Water Resources Department, Saharsa (Respondent No. 5), to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the petitioner's representation, annexed as Annexure- 2, within 90 days from the date of production of this order.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U