Patna High CourtC. REV./474/2016disposed

Arjun Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-05-10Mr. Justice Jyoti Saran2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.474 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10009 of 1999 ====================================================== Arjun Singh, Son of Ramotar Singh, Resident of Village- Bajidpur, P.S.- Ghosi, District- Jehanabad.

.... Petitioner .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Secretary, Minor Irrigation Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Commissioner, Minor Irrigation Department, New Secretariat, Patna.

4. The Chief Engineer (North) Minor Irrigation Department, Muzaffarpur.

5. The Superintending Engineer, Minor Irrigation Circle, Combined Building, Muzaffarpur.

6. The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Muzaffarpur. ...... Respondents...... Opp. Party/s

7. Krishna Prasad, son of late Hari Nandan Prasad, resident of South Mandiri, P.S. Budha Colony, District- Patna.

......... Petitioner ......... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukul Prasad, For the Respondent/s : Mr. Durgesh Nandan, AAG-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 10-05-2017 Heard Mr. Mukul Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Durgesh Nandan, learned Additional Advocate General No.14 for the State.

None had appeared for the petitioner when the writ petition was taken up for consideration and the Court taking note of the contest has dismissed the case of the petitioner for regularization, inter alia, by observing that the service of the petitioner was disapproved as back as in 1983 itself and thus he had no case for regularization. The opinion was expressed on the

Patna High Court C. REV. No.474 of 2016 (3) dt.10-05-2017 basis of the stand taken by the State in the counter affidavit which had not been contested by the petitioner by filing a rejoinder.

The present review application has been filed assailing the issue on merits which is beyond the scope of a review jurisdiction even if an appellate remedy may be available to the petitioner. The petitioner, if so advised, may exhaust the same.

No cause for indulgence in the review application is made out and the civil review application is accordingly disposed of.

(Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- U