Patna High CourtCWJC/20640/2013dismissed

Ram Bali Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-10-06Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 20640 of 2013 ====================================================== RAM BALI RAM SON OF LATE JITAN RAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SHEIKHPURA, P.S. NAUBATPUR, P.O KHAJURI, DIST PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through Commissioner-Cum-Secretary Department Of Water Resources Govt. Of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Government Of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna

3. Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Samastipur

4. Executive Engineer, Flood Control Division, Rosera ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Rudal Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr Deepak Sahay Jamuar, AC to AAG IV ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 06-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-State.

2 Pursuant to the order passed by this Court in the earlier writ petition bearing CWJC No 15095 of 2012, petitioner's claim for regularisation on post of Chowkidar in Flood Control Division, Rosera has been rejected under order dated 03.06.2013 issued by the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Samastipur. The same has been assailed in the instant proceedings.

Patna High Court CWJC No.20640 of 2013 dt.06-10-2018 2/2 3 Specific stand has been taken in the counter affidavit that after due consideration in terms of the order passed by this Court in CWJC No 15095 of 2012, the petitioner's claim was not found worthy of any positive consideration. It has been submitted that claim for regularization has been raised long after attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2012. It has also been submitted that no person below the petitioner in the panel or junior to him has been regularized and, as such, petitioner has no enforceable subsisting right.

4 Stand of respondents has not been denied or disputed by filing any rejoinder.

5 The writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 08.10.2018 Transmission Date NA