Md. Salahuddin Khan @ Md. Salauddin Khan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10186 of 2025 ====================================================== Md. Salahuddin Khan @ Md. Salauddin Khan S/o Md. Sakur Khan @ Abdul Sakur, R/o Village- Ward No.-6, Madhopur Raushan @ Madhopur Raushan, P.S- Dumra, Dist.- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary Bihar, Patna. 2.

The District Magistrate cum District Officer cum Collector, Sitamarhi. 3.

The Additional Collector, Sitamarhi.

4.

The Deputy Collector (Establishment), Sitamarhi. 5.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi Sadar, Sitamarhi. 6.

The Block Development Officer Majorganj, Dist.- Sitamarhi. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Government Pleader (12) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL ORAL ORDER 07-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel for the respondent-State.

2. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner for directing the respondents to conclude the pending departmental proceeding and also granting the benefit of 3rd M.A.C.P. to him.

3. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner stood retired from his services on 31.01.2021, during his service period he was granted the benefit of 2nd M.A.C.P in the year of 2003, thereafter, in the year 2013 he is entitled to get the benefit of 3rd M.A.C.P which has not been provided to him because of the departmental enquiry pending against him. He further submits that

Patna High Court CWJC No.10186 of 2025(2) dt.07-07-2025 2/2 the enquiry report has been submitted by the enquiry officer in the year of 2017 but, till now no decision has been taken by the respondents. Lastly, he submits that raising his grievances he already made a representation before the concerned respondents vide representation dated 26.05.2025, Annexure - P/4 series but, no decision has been taken by the concerned respondents yet.

4. Taking into consideration the submission made by the counsel, it would be appropriate to dispose of the petition at this stage, directing the concerned respondents to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner.

5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of, concerned respondents are directed to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner i.e. Annexure - P/4 dated 26.05.2025 as early as possible probably within 60 days and pass a reasoned order in accordance with relevant rules and laws. The petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court again, if occasion arises.

6. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition is disposed of.

(Arvind Singh Chandel , J) Siddharth Soni/- U