Patna High CourtCWJC/9613/2016disposed

Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-05-14Mr. Justice Jyoti Saran2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9613 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Rajesh Kumar, son of Shri Chandrika Prasad, Resident of Village - Paderry, Post Office - Satnag, Police Station - Chandi, District - Nalanda. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Deputy Director, Health Services, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

5. Bihar Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Bailey Road, Patna.

6. Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, Bailey Road, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Siya Ram Shahi, Adv. Mr. Raj Shekhar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Devendra Kr. Sinha- AAG2 Mr. Ranjan Kr. Singh, AC to PAAG 2 Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 14-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties are present. The petitioner prays for appointments against a Class IV post pursuant to a selection process initiated vide Advertisement No. 1 of 1997. Annexure- 12 to the writ petition is an order of a coordinate bench passed in C.W.J.C.No.7626 of 2014 which confirms that this petitioner had earlier also moved this Court against his non appointment to the Class IV post but the writ petition was dismissed. The inter party judgment and order dated 18.08.2015 placed at Annexure 12 has not been appealed against

Patna High Court CWJC No.9613 of 2016 (5) dt.14-05-2018 2/2 and has attained finality.

Mr. Siya Ram Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon an information received by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, 2005 for initiating a second round litigation which in my opinion, stands closed by the verdict present at Annexure- 12 rejecting the claim of the petitioner and has not been appealed against.

The writ petition is dismissed.

(Jyoti Saran, J) Bibhash/- U