Pramod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1812 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7914 of 2015 ====================================================== 1.
Pramod Kumar Son of Shri Vishwanath Prasad Singh Resident of villageDubiyahi, P.S.- Saraiya, District- Muzaffarpur 2.
Ram Balak Sharma S/o Shri Ram Chandra Thakur R/o Village-Bhatauliya, P.S. Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through Sri Deepak Kumar son of not known to the petitioner, the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.
Sri R.K. Mahajan son of not known to the petitioner Presently posted as the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3.
Dr. Prof. Rekha Kumari Wife of not known to the petitioner presently posted as the Director, Higher Education, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 4.
Dr. Amarendra Kumar Yadav son of not known to the petitioner Presently posted as the Vice Chancellor, Baba Saheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 5.
Dr. Viveka Nand Shukla S/o not known to the petitioner Presently posted as the Registrar, Baba Saheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Vijay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Vinay Prasad Singh, AC to GA-12 Mr. Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, Advocate Mr. Yash Sahay, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 27-06-2023 Heard the parties.
The petition was preferred for compliance of the order dated 03.12.2018 in CWJC No.7914 of 2015 and the concluding part of the said order is as follows:
Necessary decision on the line of the decision contained in memo no. 2699
Patna High Court MJC No.1812 of 2019(6) dt.27-06-2023 2/2 dated 10.12.2009 may be taken with regard to claim of the petitioner at the earliest with all consequential benefits within a period of four months as the State cannot adopt two different yardsticks as held out by the Apex Court in the case of R.D. Shetty vs. IAAI & Ors. reported in AIR 1979 Supreme Court 1628 where the Court held out that even in the distribution of larges and bounty the State cannot discriminate its citizen.
A show-cause on behalf of the Principal Secretary is on record by which vide a reasoned order contained in Memo No.1378 dated 14.08.2019, the claim of the petitioner was rejected incorporating that the relief granted to Rajeshwar Prasad Singh it was recorded that it will not be an example for granting relief.
In sum and substance, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected.
The petitioner is well advised to challenge the same in a writ court, if he so wants.
The contempt petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Prakash Narayan /- U