Patna High CourtMJC/1400/2017dismissed

Ranjit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-07-05Mr. Justice V. Nath2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1400 of 2017 In Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 1581 of 2016 ====================================================== Ranjit Kumar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar - Gp 23 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL ORDER 05-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This modification application has been filed for modification of the order dated 11.01.2017.

The contempt application M.J.C. No. 1581 of 2016 has been filed complaining non-compliance of the direction of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 18243 of 2013 for re-consideration of the case of the petitioner by the respondents. The contempt application, however, was disposed of in presence of the petitioner on the basis of the submission and the stand taken by the opposite parties that the said direction had been complied and the decision has been taken on 02.02.2016. The present application has been filed praying for modification of the said order on the ground that though the authorities re-considered the case of the petitioner and passed the order for his compassionate appointment after imposing

Patna High Court MJC No.1400 of 2017 (2) dt.05-07-2017 certain conditions but later on those conditions have been withdrawn by order dated 03.09.2016 (Annexure-2). It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even after taking the decision and withdrawing the condition, the opposite parties are not making appointment of the petitioner.

After considering the submissions and perusal of the materials on record, this Court does not find that sufficient cause has been made out for modification of the earlier order dated 11.01.2017 passed in M.J.C. No. 1581 of 2016. The fact is also apparent that the petitioner has no grievance as the opposite parties have taken the decision in favour of the petitioner and only grievance is that the decision for appointment of the petitioner has not been acted upon. The petitioner may have fresh cause of action for redressal of his grievance.

The present application is accordingly, dismissed. (V. Nath, J) Devendra/- U