Dr. Prabhash Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15689 of 2013 ===========================================================

1. Dr. Prabhash Kumar, son of Shri Bhola Prasad Yadav, resident of At Jayanti Prakash Bhawan, Road No. 2A, Sanjay Gandhi Nagar, Kali Mandir Road, Hanuman Nagar, District - Patna.

2. Dr. Rajkumar Raushan, son of Shri Rajendra Yadav, resident of VillageBucchaman, Post - Basudeopur Bira, District - Darbhanga .... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar.

2. The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Resources ( Pashupalan), Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Special Secretary, Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Resources ( Pashupalan) Government Of Bihar, Patna

4. The Deputy Secretary, Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Resources ( Pashupalan), Government Of Bihar, Patna

5. The Director, Animal Husbandry, Bihar, Patna.

6. The Accountant General, Bihar, Birchand Patel Path, Patna. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. A.C. to S.C.-22 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 06-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, claim has been made by the petitioners that under the policy decision the Government is required to

Patna High Court CWJC No.15689 of 2013 dt.06-12-2016 2/2 appoint 300 Travelling Veterinary Officers, but the Government instead of appointing 300 Travelling Veterinary Officers diverted the fund to the old hospitals.

These matters fall under the jurisdiction of executive, outside the consideration of Judicial Review. These are the Executive decisions and they are the best persons to decide in what manner the man power and the fund can be utilized. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this Court may direct the respondents that in future if any appointment of Travelling Veterinary Officers is made, the case of the petitioners be considered. It goes without saying that every person who ever will be eligible have liberty to apply for the post and needless to say that their cases will be considered in accordance with law.

In such view of the matter, this Court does not find any purpose to keep this matter pending. Accordingly, this case is consigned.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N/A.

Uploading Date 13.12.2016 Transmission Date