Patna High CourtCWJC/11300/2012disposed

Smt.Manju Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-10-10Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11300 of 2012 ======================================================

1. SMT. MANJU DEVI W/O SRI RAMESHWAR PRASAD GUPTA R/O VILLAGE- YADOPUR SHUKL, P.O.+P.S.- YADOPUR, DISTRICT- GOPALGANJ

2. BINOD PRASAD S/O SRI RAMCHANDRA PRASAD R/O VILLAGE- NAYATOLA BANGARI, P.O. + P.S.- YADOPUR, DISTRICT- GOPALGANJ ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. THE STATE OF BIHAR

2. CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA

3. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA

4. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, GOPALGANJ

5. DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, GOPALGANJ

6. DISTRICT PROJECT OFFICER, GOPALGANJ

7. SUBDIVISIONAL OFFICER, GOPALGANJ

8. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, GOPALGANJ

9. MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ- YADOPUR SHUKL, DISTRICTGOPALGANJ ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Prashant Kumar, AC to SC-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 10-10-2018

1. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that notwithstanding the order contained in Annexure-8 petitioners are still continuing. From perusal of the Annexure-8 it appears that District Magistrate, Gopalganj has cancelled the selection of "Prerak" Gram Panchayat Raj Yadopur and directed for inviting fresh application and after

Patna High Court CWJC No.11300 of 2012(3) dt.10-10-2018 2/3 counselling for preparing the fresh list of 'Prerak'. The aforesaid decision is dated 18.5.2012. The writ petition was filed on 03.7.2012 and till date no counter or supplementary counter affidavit has been filed by the parties on the point whether after Annexure-8 selection process was made or not.

3. Mr. Pramod Kumar submits that till date the petitioners are continuing and as such they are entitled for payment of honorarium for the period the petitioners have actually worked.

4. Considering the above the writ petition is disposed of with observation the petitioner have actually worked notwithstanding Anenxure-8 then the petitioners may be paid honorarium for the period petitioners have actually worked. So far as selection of 'Prerak' is concerned in the event of fresh selection process has been taken to its logical end no indulgence can be granted to the petitioner but in case respondents have not taken any further step for preparation of fresh panel for appointment of 'Prerak' the respondents have to consider the case of the petitioner while taking fresh selection process. With regard to payment of honorarium the decision may be taken by the respondents at the earliest preferably within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt / production of a

Patna High Court CWJC No.11300 of 2012(3) dt.10-10-2018 3/3 copy of this order.

5. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of.

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