Dr. Amitabh Bachan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19338 of 2019 ====================================================== Dr. Amitabh Bachan Son of Awadhesh Kumar, Resident of Mohalla-Professor Colony Devi Sthan, P.S.-Hisuwa, District-Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

2.

The Principal Secretay, Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Education Officer, Nawada.

4.

The District Program Officer, Establishment, Nawada. 5.

Nagar Panchayat, Hisuwa, District-Nawada.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prince Kumar Mishra For the Respondent/s :

Smt. Shilpa Singh (Ga12) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 19-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ application is discrimination in the matter of grant of benefit under Clause 6 of the notification dated 7.7.2012. Learned counsel submits that petitioner was previusly appointed as Niyojeet Shikshak on 5.6.2010 and subsequently he was appointed after clearing Net as Niyojeet Shkshak on 8.2.2014 in terms of 2012 Niyamawali.

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel submits that benefit of Clause 6 of the notification dated 7.7.2012 was extended to similarly circumstanced others but in the case of the petitioner,

Patna High Court CWJC No.19338 of 2019(2) dt.19-09-2019 2/2 respondents are adopting dilly-dally.

Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Nawada to take appropriate decision in the case of the petitioner in terms of Clause-6 of the notification dated 7.7.2012 and if any persons similarly circumstanced has been granted the benefit under Clause-6, the same may be extended to this petitioner.

Necessary decision in this regard may be taken by the respondents at the earliest preferably within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid, the writ application stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Ravi/- U