Prof. Durga Prasad Keshari And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6795 of 2013 =========================================================== Prof. Durga Prasad Keshari Son of Late Baijnath Prasad Keshari, resident of mohalla - Pujari Bazar, Jamui, Police Station - Jamui, District - Jamui

2. Prof. Anita Kumari Wife of Sri Shushil Kumar Choudhary, resident of mohalla - Maharajganj, Jamui, Police Station - Jamui, District - Jamui. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. Director Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna

4. Bihar School Examination Board through its Chairman, Patna

5. Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna

6. The Secretary Saraswati Arjun Eklavya College, Jamui

7. The Governing Body, Saraswati Arjun Aklavya College, Jamui through its Secretary

8. The Principal, Saraswati Arjun Eklavya College, Jamui ..... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pramod Kumar and Mr. Ritesh Kumar For the Respondent/s : Binita Singh Mr. Sushant Praveer, AC to SC-27 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 04-05-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is claiming the relief that the respondents should not harass, victimise, persecute or damage the petitioner in any manner in future. Further prayer has been made that respondents-authorities should also be directed not to discriminate the petitioner from other similarly situated employees of the College in

Patna High Court CWJC No.6795 of 2013 dt.04-05-2016 2/2 any manner and further prayer has been made to command the respondents not to debar the petitioner from the benefit out of the grant received and/or on funds being available, like other similarly situated persons.

The prayer of the petitioner is completely vague. There is no cause of action available to the petitioner and the writ in the nature of apprehensive writ, is premature, so much so that a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and in paragraph 8 it has been stated that petitioner no. 1 has received Rs. 1,08,440/- for the year 2008-10 and petitioners no. 2 has got a grant of Rs. 95,010/- for the year 2008-10.

In such view of the matter, this writ petition filed on apprehension, is without any basis. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Mahesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 7/5/16 Transmission Date