Baiju Kumar Rajak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9977 of 2024 ====================================================== Baiju Kumar Rajak Son of Late Chunni Lal Rajak Resident of Village- Pakki Sarai, Jail Road, Police Station- Mithanpura, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur.

5.

The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mrs. Nutan Kumari Sharma, AC to SC-21 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 01-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. There is consensus at the Bar that the matter in issue is squarely covered by the order/judgment dated 11.04.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No.7322 of 2017 (Abdus Samad Vs. the State of Bihar and others).

3. Needless to state that the Bihar Litigation Policy clearly states that the State would follow the decision in similar circumstances and would not precipitate the litigation unnecessarily to burden the litigants. This Court is everyday facing these types of cases in which similarly situated persons can be granted benefit without any delay.

Patna High Court CWJC No.9977 of 2024(2) dt.01-07-2024 2/2

4. In that view of the matter, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a detailed representation before the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Muzaffarpur (respondent no.5) along with supporting judgment and documents within a period of three weeks and the respondent no.5 is well advised to consider the case of the petitioner after affording opportunity of personal hearing or through his counsel and pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter.

5. It is made clear that respondent no.5 shall be solely liable for non-compliance of this order within the stipulated period.

6. With the aforesaid direction, this writ application stands disposed of.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U