Sushil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14070 of 2024 ====================================================== Sushil Kumar Son of Ramakant Singh Resident of Village- Katar , Post Office-Hasan Bazar, Police Station-Piro , District-Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Secretary, Rural Development Department , Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Collector cum District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram. 4.

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Rohtas at Sasaram 5.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Sasaram, District- Rohtas. 6.

The Block Development Officer , Karakat District- Rohtas. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Government Pleader 7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER 03-10-2024 The petitioner was appointed as Housing Assistant under Indira Awas Yojna, the scheme of which is being run by the Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar in association with the local panchayat. During his employment as contractual employee there was some allegation of financial irregularity committed by him, therefore, he was terminated from service.

2. Thereafter, he was directed to show cause as to why disciplinary action shall not be taken against him. He submitted reply to the show cause but without considering the reply, the

Patna High Court CWJC No.14070 of 2024(3) dt.03-10-2024 2/2 respondent No.4-Deputy Development Commissioner, Rohtas at Sasaram terminated his service.

3. Since, the petitioner is a contractual employee the provisions contained in Rule 14 and 17 of the Bihar State Governments (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 is not applicable. A contractual employee is governed by personal contract of service which may be terminated at any point of time. Therefore, the instant writ petition is not applicable.

4. However, the petitioner may claim for his redressal before the Competent Civil Court under the provisions of Specific Relief Act, claiming damages.

5. With the above order, the instant writ petition is dismissed.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J) mdrashid/- U