Sudarshan Singh v. Bihar Raj Beej Nigam Ltd.And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7215 of 1999 =========================================================== Sudarshan Singh, Son of Sri Harihar Singh, resident of Village-Korahi, P.O.- Darauli, P.S.-Bhabhua, District-Kaimur, presently posted as Typist in Bihar Raj Beej Nigam Ltd., at G.T. Road, Kudra, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Bihar Raj Beej Nigam Ltd., Indira Bhawan, IInd Floor, Ram Charitra Singh Path, Boring Canal Road, Patna through Managing Director.

2. Managing Director, Bihar Raj Beej Nigam Ltd., Indira Bhawan, IInd Floor, Ram Charitra Singh Path, Boring Canal Road, Patna-1.

3. Director, Administration, Bihar Raj Beej Nigam Ltd., Indira Bhawan, IInd Floor, Ram Charitra Singh Path, Boring Canal Road, Patna-1.

4. Company Secretary, Bihar Raj Beej Nigam Ltd., Indira Bhawan, IInd Floor, Ram Charitra Singh Path, Boring Canal Road, Patna-1.

5. Plaint Engineer, Bihar Raj Beej Nigam Ltd., G.T. Road, Kudra, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).

6. The State of Bihar.

7. The Secretary, Agriculture Department, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

8. Bureau of Public Enterprises, Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent Nos. 1-5 : Mr. Sourendra Pandey, Advocate Mr. Nalin Vilochan Tiwary, Advocate For the State : Mr. A. K. Dubey, Advocate (AC to AAG-4) =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-04-2015

Patna High Court CWJC No.7215 of 1999 dt.28-04-2015 2/2 No one appears behalf of the petitioner. Heard learned counsel representing Bihar Rajya Beej Nigam Limited as well as State.

2. The petitioner seeks a direction from this Court to regularize his service as an employee of Bihar Rajya Beej Nigam Limited, under which he claims to have been working for last fourteen years.

3. I do not find any averment in the writ application to demonstrate that the petitioner's initial engagement was made in conformity with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Additionally, I find from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents-Corporation that because of the paucity of work in the Corporation and its precarious financial condition, the Corporation is not in a position to appoint or deploy any further employee.

4. I do not find any reason to entertain the relief as sought for in the writ application.

5. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Praveen-II/- U