Patna High CourtL.P.A/1597/2014dismissed

Arvind Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-05-10Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1597 of 2014 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8111 of 2013 ============================================ Arvind Kumar Son of Late Balmiki Prasdad Singh , Resident of Mohalla -Takiapur, Near Water Tank Tower, P.S. Danapur , P.O. Digha , Dist Patna.

.... .... Appellant

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Joint Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate cum Chairman, District Health Society, Bhojpur, Ara.

5. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer-cum-Member Secretary, District Health Society, Bhojpur, Ara.

6. In-charge Medical Officer, primary Health Centre, Sandesh, Bhojpur.

7. The Administrative Officer, Bihar State Health Society, Patna.

8. Executive Director, Bihar State Health Society, Patna.

9. Mr. Deepak Kumar Sharma, the then Incharge Medical Officer Primary Health Centre, Sandesh Bhojpur, At present working as ICMO/M.O. Primary Health Centre , Garhani, District Bhojpur. .... .... Respondents ============================================ Appearance :

For the Appellant :

Mr. Prakash Chandra Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Kamlesh Kishore, AC to SC-12 For the Respondents :

Mr. K.K. Sinha, Advocate Mr. Shashi Shekhar, Advocate ============================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI And HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 10-05-2017

Patna High Court LPA No.1597 of 2014 dt.10-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the State Health Society and learned counsel for the State.

The court will not interfere with the order of learned Single Judge because it is in agreement with the principle of law that the engagement of the petitioner was on contract for service and not of service. If the contract has been breached he has common law remedy and not before a writ court.

Thus, we find no merit in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajeev/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 12.05.2017 Transmission Date NA