Shakuntala Devi And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 9563 of 2015 ======================================================

1. Shakuntala Devi wife of Sitaram Mehatar resident of village - Ujhandi, P.S. + District - Jamui.

2. Birendra Kumar Tanti son of Sudama Tanti resident of village - Kalyanpur, P.O. + P.S. + District - Jamui.

3. Brahamdeo Tanti son of Sri Ganesh Tanti resident of village - Kalyanpur, P.O. + P.S. + District - Jamui.

4. Ram Chandra Yadav son of Tulsi Yadav resident of village - Numar Tola - Bakhari, P.S. - Malaypur, District - Jamui.

5. Arvind Kumar son of Late Mahendra Prasad resident of village - Suggi, P.S. + Distt. - Jamui.

6. Sanjay Kumar son of Narayan Mandal resident of village - Harnarayanpur, P.S. + District - Jamui.

7. Shushil Kumar Sinha son of Sri Baldeo Prasad resident of village - Suggi, P.S. + Distt. - Jamui.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2.

The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Divisional Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger.

5. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Jamui.

6. The Deputy Collector (Establishment), Jamui.

7. The Additional District Magistrate, Jamui. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr Jyoti Ranjan Jha, Advocate For the S t a t e : Mr Anuj Kumar, AC to SC XII ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 14-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. A limited submission is being made on behalf of the petitioners so the matter is being taken up for final disposal. They submit that in other cases bearing CWJC No 2288 of 2016 and

Patna High Court CWJC No.9563 of 2015 (2) dt.14-05-2018 2/3 CWJC No 2639 of 2016, the case of the petitioners had been disposed of with certain observations to the District Magistrate, Jamui to consider the grievance of the petitioners and dispose of their claim for regularization in accordance with the existing policy. It is also pointed out that this Court, by judgment dated 21.02.2018, had disposed of a writ petition relying upon the order passed in the said two writ petitions in CWJC No 12988 of 2015. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners also propose to make their representation within a period of two weeks from today claming regularization in terms of the existing policy before the District Magistrate, Jamui as they have been working as candidate peons in the said district of Jamui for a long time.

Whether the petitioners are entitled and their case is worthy of consideration for regularization, it is for the District Magistrate to consider?

Needless to say that if the petitioners are found entitled to the aforesaid relief and are able to show that they are similarly situated as others in respect of whom the positive consideration had been made, then the District Magistrate, Jamui would be obliged to consider the claim of the petitioners also in accordance with law and dispose of the same expeditiously within

Patna High Court CWJC No.9563 of 2015 (2) dt.14-05-2018 3/3 a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U