Manoj Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19901 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Manoj Kumar, son of Pragas Yadav resident of village + P.O. - Ghoghsam, P.S. - Simri Bakhtiyarpur, District - Saharsa.

2. Chandan Kumar son of Siyaram Yadav resident of village + P.O. - Ghoghsam, P.S. - Simri Bakhtiyarpur, District - Saharsa.

3. Kailash Kumar son of Ludan Yadav resident of village - Gospur, P.O. - Goriyari, P.S. - Salkhua, District - Saharsa. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of General Administration, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. The Director, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development.

6. The District Magistrate, Saharsa.

7. The District Statistics Officer, Saharsa.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kumar Mukul, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh- GA-2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 05-12-2018 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present case is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 24.01.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No.11550 of 2016 (Shambhu Kumar and Ors. vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.) and other analogous cases and claiming that this petition should also be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment and order.

Patna High Court CWJC No.19901 of 2016(3) dt.05-12-2018 2/2 In the aforesaid case, the Court has not granted substantive relief to those petitioners, but has made an observation that the authority while selecting Accredited Statistical Volunteers (for short "A.S.V.") would consider the experience gained by those petitioners.

In such view of the matter, let the respondent authorities examine the case of the present petitioners vis-a-vis the case of the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No.11550 of 2016 and other analogous cases and if it is found that the facts, prayer and law of all the cases are identical, in such circumstance, the present petitioners will be given the same benefit as has been given to the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No.11550 of 2016 and other analogous cases.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- U