Kumar Dharmendra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.345 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17488 of 2010 ====================================================== Kumar Dharmendra Son of Udyanand Singh, Resident of Village- Kazi Hridyanagar, P.O.- Kajhi, Police Station- Ban Mankhi, District- Purnea. ... ... Appellant

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Secretary, Department of Rural Development, Bihar, Patna. 5.

The District Magistrate, Madhepura.

6.

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Madhepura. 7.

The Block Development Officer, Chausa, Madhepura. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Ratan Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Anjani Kumar -AAG4 Mr. Shailendra Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Resp. No. 6 :

Ms. Sunita Kumari, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD) 02-05-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred for setting aside the order dated 09.02.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 17488/2010 by which the learned Single Judge has been pleased to dismiss the writ application by holding that the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for regularization.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.345 of 2018(3) dt.02-05-2019 2/2 Learned counsel for the appellant has once again pleaded before us that this petitioner was continuously working since 1993, but after 1999, no payment has been made to the petitioner. We find from the record particularly from Annexure '11' to the writ application, which is a reasoned order passed by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Madhepura dated 31.03.2010, that the claim of the petitioner had been considered and keeping in mind the materials available on the record which showed that the petitioner was not engaged after June 1998, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected. We also find from the records that the petitioner is claiming his engagement on the post of Junior Engineer which is a post to be filled up by following the selection procedures to be initiated by the Bihar Public Service Commission. It is not a post which is to be filled up in the manner it is being sought to be done. In ultimate analysis, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order.

The Letters Patent Appeal stands dismissed.

(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ) ( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/Arvind U