← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/922/2018disposed

Ashok Kumar Upadhyay v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2020-06-11Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.922 of 2018 ====================================================== Ashok Kumar Upadhyay S/o Sheo Shankar Upadhyay, resident of MohallaPrabhat Colony, P.S.- K.Hat, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Director in Chief, Health Family Welfare, Health and Nursing Services, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. null null 3.

The Controller of Drug, Bihar, Patna.

4.

Civil Surgeon-cum- Chief Medical Officer, Katihar. 5.

The Drug Inspector, Katihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Hriday Prasad For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Mujtabul Haque- Gp12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-06-2020 The petitioner is a Class-III employee and is admittedly governed by Bihar Swasthya Kshetriya Lipikiya Samvarg Niyamawali, 2014. He has put to challenge an order dated 05.01.2018, issued by the Civil surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Katihar, whereby he has been transferred from the Office of Drug Inspector, Katihar, to Referal Hospital, Barari. The main ground on behalf of the petitioner has put the said order to challenge is that the Civil Surgeon did not have any jurisdiction to order such transfer, since the petitioner belongs to State cadre.

In the impugned order, it has been mentioned that the

Patna High Court CWJC No.922 of 2018(4) dt.11-06-2020 2/2 same has been issued on the basis of oral instructions issued by the Principal Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar.

For the present, I am not entering into the legal issues, raised in the present writ application, for the reason that when the matter was taken up on 17.01.2018, the impugned order, to the extent the same related to the petitioner, was directed to be stayed. The petitioner continued to work accordingly during all this period.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is going to superannuate with effect from 28.02.2021.

This application is accordingly disposed of with an observation that the petitioner shall be allowed to continue at his present place, where he is working till he superannuates. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) AKASH/- U