Subodh Thakur v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1078 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2546 of 2017 ====================================================== Subodh Thakur Son Of Late Domi Thakur, Resident of Village-Amari, Kukroun, P.S.-Dhamdaha, District-Purnea ... Appellant
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Purnea. 3.
The Director, Secondary Education, Patna.
4.
The District Education Officer, Purnea.
5.
The Principal M.M.R.D. High School, Amari, Purnea ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant :
Mr. Namrata Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents :
Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey -AAG 15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) 08-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the State.
This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against order dated 5.12.2017, passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No. 2546 of 2017 by which and whereunder he disposed of the writ application filed by the appellant giving direction to the concerned parties to consider the desirability of age relaxation to the appellant as one time exercise, if he is otherwise eligible for selection on the post of the peon in the school in question.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1078 of 2018(3) dt.08-01-2020 2/2 Appellant was appointed on the post of peon in the school by the concerned School Management Committee on the purely temporary basis. Subsequently, appellant claimed his regularization on the ground of long devotion towards his service for which he approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C.No. 2546 of 2017 which was disposed of by the learned Single Judge passing the impugned order, dated 5.12.2017 taking note of the law laid down in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi, reported in (2016) 4 SCC 1. Considering the aforesaid submissions as well as the facts of the case, we do not find any ground to interfere into the impugned order, and accordingly, this Letters Patent Appeal stands dismissed.
(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U