Rama Shankar Prasad, v. The State Of Bihar.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2751 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15544 of 2018 ====================================================== Rama Shankar Prasad, Son of Ramakant Rai, Village Tara Dhaman, P.S. Tara Dhaman District- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Mr Trupurari Sharan Principle Secretary Industry Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Mr. Rabinder Prasad Director Technical Development Directorate, Industry Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

Mr Pankaj Kumar Singh Director, Directorate Industry Department, Bihar, Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Dayal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh (GA-3) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 05-02-2020 The petitioner was directed vide order dated 11.03.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 15544 of 2018 to make suitable representation before the Director, Directorate of Industries Department, Government of Bihar, Patna for regularization of his service from the date of his initial appointment within a further period of four weeks, which representation was directed to be disposed of by a reasoned order within a period of six weeks thereafter.

It appears that the representation of the petitioner has been rejected by order dated 04.10.2019.

Patna High Court MJC No.2751 of 2019 dt.05-02-2020 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a flimsy distinction has been made between the cases of the petitioner and others who were given the benefit of regularization from the date of their initial appointment. The aforesaid decision of the Government could be challenged in a fresh proceeding.

Since an order of this Court was to dispose of the representation of the petitioner if filed within a specified period, that having been done, no contempt now arises. The contempt petition is thus consigned.

The petitioner has the liberty to challenge the aforesaid order in an appropriate proceeding. (Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 06.02.2020 Transmission Date