Vijay Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4440 of 2016 ====================================================== Vijay Singh Son of late Dashrath Singh Resident of Village- Terri PSMehandia district Arwal. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Water Resources Department , Government of Bihar,Patna 3.

The Chief Engineer Water Resources Department , Government of Bihar,Patna 4.

The Superintending Engineer, Water Resources Department, Dehri on Sone, Rohtas at Sasaram.

5.

The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department Sone Nahar Adhunikikaran Permanal Nasriganj District Rohtas at Sasaram 6.

The Accountant General Bihar, Patna.

7.

The Treasury Officer, Arwal District Arwal.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar No. 1 For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Satyendra Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 19-06-2019 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the respondents-State.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that punishment which forms issue in the instant proceedings was subject matter of criminal proceeding in GR no. 619/2002 before the Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj. He submits that petitioner on the same set of charge had been acquitted from the criminal charge as would be evident from the order of the appellate court dated 30.06.2014.

Patna High Court CWJC No.4440 of 2016(4) dt.19-06-2019 2/2 Placing reliance on the acquittal of criminal case for the same allegation and on the same set of charge, he submits that he would be approaching respondent no.2 (The Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Water Resources department) with representation to consider punishment awarded to the petitioner placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of M. Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd and another reported in 1999(3) SCC 679.

In view of said submission since consideration has to be made by the respondent-authority, writ proceedings need not be kept pending.

Writ petition is disposed of with the liberty as prayed for.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) s.hassan/- U