Kumar Rama Shankar v. Triveni Prasad Yadav And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL REVIEW No.319 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8366 of 2018 ====================================================== Kumar Rama Shankar son of Late Murlidhar Yadav Resident of at P.O. Mauzam Patti Via Barhara Kothi, District Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Triveni Prasad Yadav and Ors son of Late Chintamani Yadav Resident of Ward No. 4, Laloo Nagar Madhpura, P.O. P.S. District- Madhepura. 2.

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Higher Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The B.N. Mandal University through its Registrar having office at Laloo Nagar, Madhepura.

4.

The Vice Chancellor, B.N. Mandal University having office at Laloo Nagar, Madhepura.

5.

The Registrar, B.N. Mandal University having office at Laloo Nagar Madhepura.

6.

Principal Parwati Science College, Kirti Nagar, Madhepura. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr.Binodanand Mishra, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Prabhat Ranjan Singh, AC to AAG-15 For the BNMU :

Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 27-02-2019 This review petition has been filed for review of the order dated 18.7.2018 passed in CWJC No. 8366 of 2018. On 18.7.2018 while disposing of the writ petition the Court taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner's name figures in letter no. 181(C ) dated 18.12.1989, directed the University to take appropriate decision in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of the State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Bihar Rajya MSESKK Mahasangh & Ors: (2005) 9 SCC 129 and the decision taken by this Court in CWJC No. 17670 of 2017. Learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that

Patna High Court C. REV. No.319 of 2018(5) dt.27-02-2019 2/2 this petitioner was not heard although he was respondent No. 6 in the writ petition.

This Court on the previous occasion vide order dated 13.02.2019 made it clear that on the next date the court will clarify the effect of the order passed in the connected writ petition on this review petitioner.

After hearing Mr. Binodanand Mishra, learned counsel for the review petitioner and considering the fact that the case of the review petitioner falls in the category of recommended posts in terms of Justice S.C.Agrawal Commission report, the case of the review petitioner stands on different footing and in that view of the matter, the order passed in the connected writ petition will not cause any prejudice to the review petitioner in the matter of taking final decision in accordance with law in terms of the order passed by the Apex Court.

With the aforesaid, the review petition stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) spandey/- U