Patna High CourtC. REV./193/2015allowed

Dr. Elsn Bala Prasad The Then Divisional Commissioner Patna Division Patna v. Sangeeta Kumari And ORS

2016-11-16Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.193 of 2015 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 904 of 2014 =========================================================== Dr. E.L.S.N. Bala Prasad, the then Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna (Respondent No. 3 in the writ petition).

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. Sangeeta Kumari , Wife of Sri Piyash Kumar Resident of Village - Chainpur, P.O. - chainpur, P.S. - Chainpur, District - Kaimur (Bhabua).

2. The State of Bihar through, the Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Integrated Child Development Services (I.C.D.S.), Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua).

5. The District Level Selection Committee, through its Chairman-cum-District Magistrae, Kaimur (Bhabua).

6. The District Program Officer, Kaimur.

7. Ragini Srivastav Wife of Sushil Kumar Resident of Ward No. 5, Bhabua. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Priyank Deepak For the Respondent/s : Mr. GA9 A.K.SINHA =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 16-11-2016 The review application has been filed on behalf of the erstwhile Divisional Commissioner, Patna against the observation made in the first paragraph of the order dated 05.02.2015, passed in CWJC No.904 of 2014.

2. The petitioner has accepted the mistake, which he had committed but has also explained the circumstances in paragraph-7 of the review application. He had also taken remedial measures to undo the mistake, which was committed not intentionally but due to wrong inputs provided by the subordinate authority.

Patna High Court C. REV. No.193 of 2015 dt.16-11-2016 2 / 2

3. In view of the above, the impugned order stands modified. The inconsistency explained. In the opinion of the Court, the erstwhile Division Commissioner has learnt his lesson on over reliance over the subordinates. The said observation, therefore, is read down.

4. Civil Review application is allowed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) S.Kumar/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 18.11.2016 Transmission Date