Dr. Devendra Prasad v. The Union Of India And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.13409 of 2000 dt.27-07-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13409 of 2000 =========================================================== Dr. Devendra Prasad son of late Khashi Mahto resident of village Nona P.S. Nalanda, District Nalanda at present Head of the Department of Pali, K.L.S. College Nawadha, a constitutent unit of Magadh University. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Culture Human Resources Department, New Delhi.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Culture, Human Resources Department, New Delhi.

3. The State of Bihar through Director Higher Education New Secretariate, Patna.

4. Board of Management, Nav Nalanda Mahavihar through its Chairman, Hon'ble the Governor of Bihar, Raj Bhawan, Patna

5. Secretary to the Governor, Mithilesh Kumar, Raj Bhavan, Patna.

6. Ravindra Panth, Director, Nav Nalanda Mahavihar, Nalanda.

7. B.N. Singh, Senior Most Professor Deptt. Of Pali, Nava Nalanda Mahavihar, Nalanda.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sujit Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Awadesh Kumar Pandey, SCG -2 Mr. Ravindra Kumar Sharma, CG - 2 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

Following is the relief sought for in the present writ application.

"This is an application for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction for calling and quashing of appointment order dated 24.04.2000 of respondent no. 6 on

Patna High Court CWJC No.13409 of 2000 dt.27-07-2015 the post of Director, Nav Nalanda Mahavihar and further for a direction to the Mahavihar to appoint respondent no.

to function as care taker Director of Mahavihar till it is taken over by the Central Government with its assets and liability".

I am of the view that no relief as sought for in this writ application, can be granted in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. I find that the writ application filed on behalf of the petitioner is not maintainable, in view of the pleadings in the writ application and even otherwise it appears that with the efflux of time, the present writ application has lost any purpose, whatsoever. The writ application is accordingly, dismissed. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Jagdish/- U