Lalit Kishore Pandey v. The Bihar State Cooperative Marketing Union Limited Biscomaun And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11143 of 2016 ======================================================
1. Lalit Kishore Pandey, Son of Late Bindeshwari Pandey, resident of Village- Ubhay, Post- Laxman Bigha, Police Station- Paraiya, Distt.- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar State Cooperative Marketing Union Limited ( Biscomaun ) through its Managing Director, Biscomaun Bhawan, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna-1.
2. The Chairman-cum- Appellate Authority, BISCOMAUN, Biscomaun Bhawan, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna-1.
3. The Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union Limited, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna-1.
4. The Administrator, the Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union Limited, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna-1.
5. The Secretary, the Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union Limited, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna-1.
6. The Rajendra Prasad, the then Range Officer, BISCOMAUN, Sales Centre Saur Bazar, Saharsa.
7. Sri Murli Singh, the In-charge Senior Range Officer, BISCOMAUN, Darbhanga.
8. The Special Officer, Administration, BISCOMAUN, Patna.
9. Sri Rameshwar Prasad Gupta, Sub-Divisional Audit Officer, the Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union Limited, BISCOMAUN, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mithlesh Prasad Singh, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ishwari Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 21-07-2016 Learned counsel for the parties are present. Apparently the writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Chairman, Bihar State Cooperative Marketing Union Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'BISCOMAUN') whereby the services of the petitioner is terminated and which is being put to challenge in the present writ petition.
Patna High Court CWJC No.11143 of 2016 (3) dt.21-07-2016 2/2 In view of the Special Bench judgment passed by this Court reported in 2014(1) PLJR 695, the writ petition is held not maintainable and is disposed of as such leaving it open for the petitioner to take recourse to such other remedy that may be available to him in law.
(Jyoti Saran, J) Bibhash/- U