Vijendra Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10376 of 2014 =========================================================== Vijendra Kumar Singh Son of Late Bageshwari Singh resident of Village - Sawar, P.S. Barauli, District - Gopalganj.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Commissioner, Saran, Chapra

3. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj

4. The Conducting Officer, - cum - the then Director Account Administration, Gopalganj

5. The Block Development Officer, Hathua, District - Gopalganj

6. The Block Development Officer, Gopalganj .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Srivastava, Advocate Mr. Bir Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. M.K. Upadhyay, AC to GP 3. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 24-11-2017 Heard counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.K. Upadhyay, G.P 3 for the State.

On the allegation of unauthorized absence, the order of punishment withholding three annual increments with cumulative effect has been inflicted upon the petitioner. The punishment order is dated 29.09.2010 and has been passed by the D.M. Gopalganj. The petitioner thereafter, preferred the appeal against the said order before the Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra and by the impugned order the said appeal has been dismissed due to the petitioners non-

Patna High Court CWJC No.10376 of 2014 dt.24-11-2017 2/2 appearance on several dates which have been mentioned in the impugned order dated 21.06.2013 passed by the Court of Commissioner, Saran Division Chapra. From perusal of the said order it appears that while dismissing the petitioner's appeal a liberty has been granted to apply for fresh restoration of appeal. In view of the aforesaid liberty granted by the appellate order which has been challenged by the petitioner, there is no scope for any interference in the order impugned. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.

However, it will be open to the petitioner to avail his remedy in accordance with law.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) Prakash/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 25.11.2017 Transmission Date