Sarita Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.503 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13446 of 2000 ====================================================== Sarita Singh, Wife of Late Anil Kumar Singh, R/o Village- Bhartipur, Bhagwanpur, Post Office- Saraiya, P.S.- Sakara, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

3.

The Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

4.

The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hazipur. 5.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

6.

The District Education Officer, Vaishali at Hazipur. 7.

The District Compassionate Committee, Vaishali through its Chairman, the District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hazipur.

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

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shashi Shekhar Tiwari, AC to AAG-15 For the Education Department : Mr. Ram Kishore Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR) Date : 23-02-2023 Though this appeal was entertained for quite sometime and for verification of the correctness of the statement made by the appellant and the Director of Secondary Education was also called in the Court but we find that there has been an unusual delay of six years and

Patna High Court L.P.A No.503 of 2019 dt.23-02-2023 2/3 twenty-seven days in preferring this appeal.

It appears that the matter was entertained only for the reason that the appellant is a widow of the person who claims to have been appointed against a sanctioned and vacant post. It was one of the grounds urged in the appeal that the facts recorded in the learned Single Judge's order that the husband of the appellant was employed on temporary basis is incorrect. Only to test this, the Director, the Appellate Authority before whom, according to the appellant, the appeal preferred by her late husband had been pending, was called.

There is no record of such an appeal available in the Director's Office.

The learned counsel for the appellant, however, submits that the Office of the Director, Secondary Education had been searching for an appeal preferred by the appellant when in fact the appeal had been preferred by her late husband.

Be that as it may, from the averments made in the memo of appeal a copy of which has been furnished by the learned counsel for the appellant, it is absolutely clear

Patna High Court L.P.A No.503 of 2019 dt.23-02-2023 3/3 that the husband of the appellant was not permanently employed.

Thus, on the ground of limitation, this appeal is rejected.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) (Harish Kumar, J) uday/rishiAFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 01.03.2023 Transmission Date