Anita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.738 of 2011 ====================================================== Anita Kumari daughter of Late Nandjee Paswan resident of Mohalla Jawahar Tola Ara, P.S. Nawada Ara, Dist. Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through Chief Secretary Bihar, Patna

2. The Chairman Bihar Public Service Commission Patna.

3. Secretary Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna.

4. Special Executive Officer Bihar Public Service Commission, Bihar Patna.

5. Sushma Bhaleria Toppo , W/o Late Nanjdjee Paswan village Milthuwani P.S. Krishna Garh District Bhojpur at present Naurganj, P.O. Wazirganj District Gaya .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Nath Sinha For the Respondent/s : Sri Durga Narain Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-01-2016 Heard Sri Rajendra Nath Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AC to GP No. 2 as well as Sri Durga Narain Jha, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of the respondent no. 2 to 4/ officials of the Bihar Public Service Commission. Today again, none appeared on behalf of the respondent no. 5. Yesterday also there was non appearance on her behalf.

The petitioner, invoking writ jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for directing the respondents to appoint her on compassionate ground.

Patna High Court CWJC No.738 of 2011 (7) dt.13-01-2016 2/2 It has been pleaded that father of the petitioner was an employee in the Bihar Public Service Commission and died in harness on 13.6.2005. Thereafter, application was filed for appointment. However, due to one reason or the other, till date it has not been finalized.

In this case a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2 to 4 and a stand has been taken that despite the fact that petitioner was asked to produce succession certificate, till date it has not been produced and matter is under consideration. Such statement has been made in paragraph no. 18 of the counter affidavit.

In view of the facts and circumstances particularly stand taken in paragraph no. 18 of the counter affidavit, the court proposes to dispose of the writ petition with an expectation that respondent no. 2 to 4 may take appropriate decision in accordance with law without any unnecessary delay if the petitioner renders proper co-operation .

The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U