Amlendu Kumar Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4408 of 2018 ====================================================== Amlendu Kumar Ranjan Son of Harendra Prasad resident of Flat No. 12 B, Shish Mahal Apartment, Road No. 13 - C Near Bahadurpur Gumati, Rajendra Nagar, Sampat Chak, P.S. Bibhutipur, District - Patna at present Executive Engineer, Urban Development and Housing Department, Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary, Road Construction Departme 5.

The Chief Engineer Mechanical-cum-Conducting Officer, North Bihar Upper Division, Road Constructio 6.

The Director Purchase and Transportation-cum-Presenting Officer, Road Construction Department, Bih 7.

The Deputy Secretary Vigilance, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

8.

The Superintending Engineer, Road Circle, Muzaffarpur. 9.

The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Motihari. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Syed Eqbal Ahmad-Sc20 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 25-09-2023 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though Ms. Puspanjali Sharma, learned SC-20 is present. The petitioner has prayed for the following relief: (i) the order dated 7.9.17 communicated to the petitioner vide Memo no. 8019(5) dated 7.9.17 whereby and where under the petitioner has

Patna High Court CWJC No.4408 of 2018(3) dt.25-09-2023 2/2 been inflicted a punishment wherein three annual increments have been stopped with noncumulative effect under Rule 14(V) of Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 2005), be quashed;

(ii) the Memo no. 245 (5) dated 9.1.18 whereby and where under the revision application filed by the petitioner against Memo no. 8019(5) dated 7.9.17 has been rejected, be quashed;

(iii) the respondents be directed to extend all consequential benefits to the petitioner thereof. Since there is no appearance, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U