← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/16123/2011disposed

Raj Kishore Roy v. The Bihar State Electricity Bo

2018-11-22Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16123 of 2011 ====================================================== RAJ KISHORE ROY S/O LATE SATYA NARAYAN ROY R/O MOHALLAKASHIPUR (INFRONT OF TIRHUT ACADEMY SCHOOL), P.S. AND DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA, THROUGH IT'S CHAIRMAN

2. THE SECRETARY BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA

3. THE JOINT SECRETARY BIHAR, STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA, VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA

4. THE CHIEF MANAGER CUM CHIEF ENGINEER MITHILA ELECTRIC SUPPLY DIVISION, DARBHANGA

5. THE ELECTRICAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (R.E.)-CUMCONDUCTING OFFICER BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Devendra Prasad Singh, Advocate Mr. Uma Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Jyoti Prakash, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 22-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent State.

Short issue raised by the counsel for the petitioner in the instant writ proceeding is that pursuant to the resolution dated 10.05.2011 whereby charges were communicated to the petitioner he has already submitted his written statement before the Enquiry Officer, and that no final decision is being taken in the proceedings which was initiated on the basis of the said charge memo along with the supplementary charge memo dated

Patna High Court CWJC No.16123 of 2011 dt.22-11-2018 2/2 04.07.2011. He submits that such pendency is highly unjustified.

In view of the limited submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed off. This Court would however, observe that the respondents would be obliged to conclude the proceedings arising out of the said charge memo after affording due opportunity to the petitioner and in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

Prakash/- (Madhuresh Prasad, J) AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date