← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/15206/2013dismissed

Md. Ziya Uddeen v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-11-19Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15206 of 2013 =========================================================== Md. Ziya Uddeen Son Of Suaib Uddeen Residence Of Village- Khojuchak, PoSonpura, Ps- Simari Bakhtiyarpur, District- Saharsa .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna

3. The Home Commissioner, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

4. The Deputy Inspector General, Human Rights, Bihar, Patna

5. The Inspector General of Police, Patna Range, Patna

6. The Chairman, Constable Selection Board, Bhagalpur

7. The Chairman, Constable Selection Board, Saharsa

8. The Chairman, Constable Selection Board, Purnea

9. The Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur

10. The Superintendent of Police, Saharsa

11. The Superintendent of Police, Purnea .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sheel Bhadra Jha, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Sinha, AC to SC-14 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 19-11-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State.

In this case, the matter relates to the appointment of Constable in the year 2004. Already the appointment has been made, the persons selected have already joined to the post and the left over vacancies have been consumed in the subsequent selection. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one contempt matter is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court but the contempt has nothing to do with the substantive proceedings.

Patna High Court CWJC No.15206 of 2013 dt.19-11-2016 Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed on account of delay.

However, if an order is passed in the contempt matter which is in favour of the petitioner, in that case, the petitioner will have also a liberty to extract benefit from that order. (Shivaji Pandey, J) Rishi/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 22.11.2016 Transmission Date