Vijay Kumar Singh, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16160 of 2021 ====================================================== Vijay Kumar Singh, Son of Late Ramchandra Singh, R/o Village-Saif Ganj, P.O. and P.S.-Bankey Bajar, District-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The commissioner MANREGA, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Joint Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5.

The District Magistrate, Gaya.

6.

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Gaya.

7.

The Block Development Officer, Block-District-Gaya. 8.

The Programme Officer, Imamganj, District-Gaya. 9.

The Programme Officer, Dumaria, District-Gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Alok Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Anjani Kumar ( Aag4 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 24-01-2024

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief(s):- "1(I) For Quashing order as contained in memo no. 273(GO) dated 17.04.2018 issued under the signature of Deputy Development Commissioner, Gaya, by which the services of the petitioner from the post of Panchayat rojgar Sevak, has been terminated, by a cryptic order, in a most arbitrary and illegal manner, without following any procedure, with a predetermined mind, without of any showcause, without considering statement of

Patna High Court CWJC No.16160 of 2021(2) dt.24-01-2024 2/3 defense, without applying any independent judicial mind, in teeth of principals of Natural justice and violation of statutory provisions.

(II) For quashing of the order issued by the District magistrate Gaya, passed in appeal case dated 23.10.2018, by which the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and order passed by DDC Gaya, has been affirmed and petitioner has been declared guilty with a predetermined mind and in a very mechanical, discriminatory manner, without considering the fact that nothing has been found against the petitioner, and allegation of negligence has been leveled against the petitioner and the service of the petitioner has been terminated and the order of termination has been affirmed and for the same charges other has been exonerated by giving some punishment, which proves the discriminatory and bias attitude of the authorities as against the petitioner and the same is in teeth/violation of principles of natural justice and the same is also contrary to settled principals of law as laid down through various judicial pronouncement by Hon'ble High court and Hon'ble Apex court.

(III) Further for quashing the order dated 13.04.2021 issued under the signature of Commissioner MANREGA, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar Patna, as contained in memo no.449345 dated 29.04.2021 issued under the signature of Joint Secretary, Rural

Patna High Court CWJC No.16160 of 2021(2) dt.24-01-2024 3/3 Development Department, Government of Bihar, by which revision filed on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed in most arbitrary, illegal, and in a very mechanical manner, without considering reply of the petitioner, in a very arbitrary and illegal manner which is in teeth/violation of principles of natural justice and the same is also contrary to settled principals of law as laid down through various judicial pronouncement by Hon'ble High court and Hon'ble Apex court.

(IV). For declaring the order of termination of the service of the petitioner bad in law and for directing and commanding the respondent authority to reinstate the services of the petitioner and to pay all the consequential benefits attached to the said post from the date of termination."

2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks not to press the present writ petition, however, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to avail such other alternative remedies as are otherwise available under the law, for redressal of his aforesaid grievances. Liberty so sought is granted.

3. The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Saurav/- U