Jagdeo Bhindwar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court MJC No.831 of 2015 (5) dt.19-01-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.831 of 2015 In LPA 1620 of 2013 ====================================================== Jagdeo Bhindwar S/o Late Ramnarayan Bhindwar, R/o At + P.O.- Suggapatti, P.S. -n Phulparas, District- Madhubani, Presently Posted as Assistant Teacher in Govt. Sanskrit High School - Ara, District- Ara. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, District- Patna, namely Mr. Anjani Kumar Singh , I.A.S. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.N.Shahi, Sr. Advocate, AAG-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA) 19-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General No.10.

The contempt application has been filed alleging that the disobedience of the order dated 20.01.2015 passed in LPA No.1620 of 2013.

A show cause has been filed on behalf of Opposite Party No.6 in which it is stated that by resolution dated 05.01.2016 the State Government has complied with the order of this Court by passing the necessary order which is at Annexure-A. It is further submitted that pursuant to the said resolution consequential notification dated 05.01.2016 has also been issued which is annexed as Annexure-B in which list of concerned

Patna High Court MJC No.831 of 2015 (5) dt.19-01-2016 employees has been mentioned and the name of the petitioner appears at serial no.150.

Learned counsel for the petitioner next submitted that the date of merger in service has been shown as 15.09.1994 whereas the petitioner has joined his service in the year 1983. It is evident from the facts stated in the show cause that the order under contempt has been complied with. So far as the grievance of the petitioner regarding wrong date of merger is concerned, the same is a matter of record for which the petitioner shall file a representation before the authorities which would be considered and disposed of by the respondent authority within a period of two months from the date of filing of the representation. The contempt application is, accordingly, dismissed subject to the aforesaid observations.

Any other issue regarding posting, etc. may be raised by the petitioner by further representation before the authorities which shall be considered in accordance with law expeditiously. (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J) (Sudhir Singh, J) B.Kr./-Sudip U