Shambhu Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.183 of 2015 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14414 of 2014 =========================================================== Shambhu Singh, son of Late Ramayan Singh, Resident of village-Hussepur, P.S. Amnour District Saran.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary namely R.K. Mahajan, Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

2. Shridhar C., the Director (Primary Education), Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. Rajendra Ram, the Director (Administration)-cum-Additional Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. Ramayan Ram, the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saran Division, at Chapra.

5. Shiwendra Sharma, the District Education Officer, Saran at Chapra. .... Opposite parties.

=========================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Avnish Nandan Sinha =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 04-02-2017 Heard the parties.

2.

In this application, complaint has been made by the petitioner that the order dated 28.08.2014 passed in C.W.J.C. No.14414 of 2014 has not been complied with, whereby this Court has directed to the Director, Primary Education, to consider the recommendation of the R.D.D.E. and take a final decision in accordance with law with consequential orders by placing the name of the petitioner at appropriate serial in the gradation list and for

Patna High Court MJC No.183 of 2015 dt.04-02-2017 2/2 granting any benefits of promotion etc. as may be flowing from his placement in the gradation list at appropriate place at the earliest. 3.

A show cause has been filed by the State, annexing the order dated 09.09.2015 signed by the Director, Primary Education. From a perusal of the aforesaid order, it appears that the correction has been made in the gradation list and the petitioner has been placed at correct place. The petitioner has also been granted the benefit of promotion, but not from the date the juniors to the petitioner have been granted the promotion.

4.

This Court in the contempt proceeding cannot look into the merit of the order dated 09.09.2015. In such view of the matter, there is no need to keep this matter pending. Accordingly, this proceeding is dropped. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the authority, it will be open to him to challenge the same in accordance with law.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N/A.

Uploading Date 07.02.2017 Transmission Date