Arun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.248 of 2015 Arising out of LPA No. 546 of 2012 =========================================================== Arun Kumar Son of Late Upendra Narayan Mandal @ Upendra Prasad Mandal @ Smt. Sushila Devi Resident of Village-Amri, P.O.-Amri Biharnpur, P.S.-Bihpur, Dist.-Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Secretary, Department of Industries, Govt. of Bihar, patna

3. Director (Handloom and Sericulture) Govt. of Bihar, Patna

4. Assistant Director, Industries (Sericulture) Bhagalpur

5. D.M. cum Collector, Bhagalpur .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.P. Gupta, GP-X Mr. Binod Kumar, A.C. to GP-X =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 23-11-2016 Re.:I.A. No. 9342 of 2015 For the reasons mentioned in the Limitation Petition, the delay of eight months and eighteen days in filing the Review Application is condoned.

I.A. No. 9342 of 2015 stands allowed.

Re.: Civil Review No. 248 of 2015 The petitioner has sought review of the order dated 14.07.2014 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 546 of 2012 whereby, the order of the learned Single Bench not

Patna High Court C. REV. No.248 of 2015 dt.23-11-2016 2/2 accepting the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground has been affirmed. The learned Single Bench has recorded its finding that Class-VIII certificate filed by the petitioner is a forged certificate which has been reported by the Headmaster of the school in his communication to the Deputy Superintendent of Education, Bhagalpur. Still further, date of birth of the petitioner and his father's name in the Matriculation certificate and the date of birth and father's name given by the petitioner in his application are discrepant. It was, thus, found that the petitioner has not made out a case for appointment on compassionate ground.

2. We do not find any error apparent on the record which may warrant review of the order in view of the findings recorded, which are findings of fact.

3. Accordingly, the Review Application is dismissed. (Hemant Gupta, ACJ) (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Sanjeet/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 29.11.2016 Transmission Date N.A.