Mahesh Sharma v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5131 of 2017 =========================================================== Mahesh Sharma S/o Late Kawal Sharma, R/o Village- Shikarpur, P.O.- Shikarpur, P.S.- Majhaulia, District- West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

2. The Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Committee, A/28, Kailash Colony, New Delhi.

3. The Deputy Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Committee, Regional Office, Boring Road, Patna.

4. The Principal, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Vrindavan, PO & PS- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran.

5. CG Hooda, The Principal, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Vrindavan, PO & PSChanpatia, District- West Champaran.

6. Maya Mishra, PGT (Hindi), Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Vrindavan, PO & PS- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran.

7. Md. Nasib Ansari, PGT (English), Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Vrindavan, PO & PS- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran.

8. Satish Chandra Jha, PGT (Maths) Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Vrindavan, PO & PS- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran.

9. Smt. Rita Devi W/o Surendra Prasad, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Vrindavan, PO & PS- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Verma, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.D Sanjay, Addl. Solicitor General =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 09-05-2017 The Court will not interfere with the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 30th March, 2016 passed in O.A. No. 419 of 2012 not only for the reasons provided by the Tribunal for refusing to grant relief, but also keeping in mind that the

Patna High Court CWJC No.5131 of 2017 dt.09-05-2017 2/2 selection and appointment related to the year 2000 for an advertisement of the year 1999 and it is an accepted position that the application of the present petitioner did not reach the authorities by the cut-off date, which led to selection and appointment of the private Respondent No.9, who has been working in that capacity for a decade and half.

In view of the above, order of the Central Administrative Tribunal is not required to be interfered with. Writ is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Arjun/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 10 .05.2017 Transmission Date NA