Uma Shankar Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16709 of 2014 ===========================================================

1. Uma Shankar Singh Son of Ram Bilash Singh, resident of village Balua, PostBelghat Balua, P.S.- Arrah Muffasil, District- Bhojpur

2. Mahanth Singh, Son of Uttam Singh, resident of village Bhadehan, Post Basantpur P.S.- Arrah Muffasil, District- Bhojpur

3. Chunni Lal Singh, son of Kundan Singh, resident of village- Jagdishpur, DistrictBhojpur

4. Chandra Shekhar Pathak, son of Vishwanath Pathak, resident of VillageSaidpur, Post- Badka Dun, P.S.- Arrah Muffasil, District- Bhojpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Public and Administration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna

4. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Arrah

5. The Additional Collector, Bhojpur at Arrah

6. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Bhojpur at Arrah

7. The Deputy Collector Establishment, Bhojpur at Arrah

8. The Nazarat Deputy Collector, Bhojpur at Arrah .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Subhas Singh For the Respondent/s: Mr. S K Sharma, AC to AAG 5 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 30-03-2016 Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the State. Petitioners are candidates who have failed to make it to the list of persons who came to be regularized under Bhojpur Collectorate.

Many a things have been alleged with regard to the manner in which such regularization has been done but unfortunately most of the submissions made at the bar stand answered by a detailed decision

Patna High Court CWJC No.16709 of 2014 dt.30-03-2016 which has been taken by the Committee in taking the decision of regularization, which has been annexed as Annexure-D to the counter affidavit, filed on behalf of the district administration. The vacancy position, reservation position, the modality for such eligibility and regularization, all has been clearly laid down and applied across the board. There are bound to be certain aggrieved persons, especially when they are left out from the benefit of regularization, if they have failed to fulfil the parameters which have been utilized and applied across the board. But these are individual grievances which can very well be raised before the competent authority in specifics. The competent authority would be free to tell the petitioners where they belong in matters of such regularization. Generality of allegations cannot form the basis of investigation on such a large scale of regularization.

Writ application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners as above.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) R.K.Pathak/- U