Patna High CourtL.P.A/1945/2016disposed

Jitendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-11-13The Chief Justice,Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1945 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8036 of 2015 ====================================================== Jitendra Kumar, S/o Shri Hari Narayan Sharma, Resident of Village Shitalpur, PO Amarpura, PS Mohammadpur, District Gopalganj ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj.

3. The District Programme Officer, Gopalganj.

4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Gopalganj.

5. The Block Educational officer, Sidhwalia, Gopalganj

6. Basant Kumar Singh, S/o Ramji Singh, R/o Village Mohammadpur, P.SMohammadpur, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Ranjan Kumar Srivastava, Advocate Mrs. Rajani Gandha, Advocate Mr. Bir, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, - AAG15 Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 13-11-2017 Having heard learned counsel for the parties, in case the appellant has any grievance with regard to appointment of Respondent No. 6 and it is his contention that Respondent No. 6 has obtained appointment on the basis of forged document, he may submit a representation in this regard to Respondent No. 3, the District Programme Officer, Gopalganj who shall after notice to Respondent No. 6, after granting him

Patna High Court LPA No.1945 of 2016 dt.13-11-2017 2/2 an opportunity of hearing and after taking note of all the facts and circumstances shall take a decision in accordance with law within a period of three months. We may make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter and have only directed Respondent No. 3 to consider the representation of the appellant and take a decision in accordance with law which will include grant of opportunity to Respondent No. 3 and thereafter passing a speaking order. With the aforesaid, the Letters Patent Appeal stands disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) P.K.P.

AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 14.11.2017 Transmission Date