Patna High CourtL.P.A/1588/2017dismissed

The State Of Bihar And ORS v. Dr. Naresh Prasad Singh

2018-02-21Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad,The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1588 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10095 of 2016 ======================================================

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar.

2. Special Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar.

3. Joint Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar.

4. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar.

5. The Under Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

Dr. Naresh Prasad Singh, son of Late Banke Singh, resident of Main Road, Barh, (Near Kachhahri), P.S.- Barh, District- Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Prem Ranjan Kumar ( AC to AAG IX ) For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 21-02-2018 Delay of 217 days in filing of the appeal is condoned. I.A. No.8132 of 2017 is allowed and disposed of. After the termination of the respondent employee was set aside by the learned Writ Court in C.W.J.C. No.3517 of 2010 and L.P.A. No.1636 of 2014 filed by the State Government was also dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court, in the matter of grant of consequential benefit, the petition in question has been allowed and the learned Writ Court in a detailed order has held that once the termination and the disciplinary action

Patna High Court LPA No.1588 of 2017 (3) dt.21-02-2018 2/2 taken against the petitioner was found to be illegal and he was reinstated in service, the consequential benefit of salary has to be granted and salary for the period cannot be denied on the principle of no work no pay. In holding so, we are of the considered view that the learned Writ Court has not committed any error warranting reconsideration.

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) K.C.jha/- U