Patna High CourtCWJC/17245/2014disposed

Om Prakash v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-08-27Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17245 of 2014 ====================================================== Om Prakash son of late Shambhu Saran Prasad, Resident of VillageBharwalia, P.S.- Palanawa, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar.

2. The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.

3. The District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah.

4. The District Programme Officer ( Establishment) West Champaran, Bettiah.

5. The Block Development Officer, Mainatand, District- West Champaran.

6. The Block Education Officer, Mainatand, District- West Champaran.

7. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Laxmipur, Mainatand Block, District- West Champaran.

8. The Panchayat Secreatary-cum- Secretary, Panchyayat Teacher Appointment Committee, Gram Panchayat Raj Laxmipur, Mainatand Block, District- West Champaran.

9. The Civil surgeon-cum- Chief Medical Officer, Motihari, DistrictEast Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satyavrat Verma For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha, G.A.-7 :

Mr. Gopal Krishna, AC to G.A.-7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 27-08-2018 Mr. Satyavrat Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner admits that disability of the petitioner is 30 per cent whereas requirement is 40 per cent, therefore, he cannot improve the case even if the matter is remitted back to the authority to take decision afresh. As far as issue of recovery is concerned, he submits that there is no fraud or misrepresentation by the petitioner, as such, order of recovery is unsustainable. Mr. Verma submits that so far as recovery part is

Patna High Court CWJC No.17245 of 2014(3) dt.27-08-2018 2/2 concerned, he has already filed C.W.J.C. No. 14115 of 2014 and as such he submits that the issue of recovery would be reconsidered appropriately in the aforesaid C.W.J.C. and as such he is not pressing the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as not pressed. The disposal of this writ petition will not cause any prejudice in deciding the another writ petition filed by the writ petitioner i.e. C.W.J.C. No. 14115 of 2014.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) T.Kr./- U