Santosh Kumar, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19827 of 2019 ====================================================== Santosh Kumar, Son of Late Mahendra Prasad Ojha, Resident of VillageOjhawalia (Kala), P.O.-Andhari, P.S. Chauri, District-Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Special Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Director, Integrated Child Development Scheme (I C D S), Bihar, Patna. 5.

The Establishment Officer, Head Quarter, I C D S Directorate, Bihar, Patna. 6.

The Zila Padadhikari, East Champaran, Motihari. 7.

The Zila Programme Officer, East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suresh Prasad Bhakta, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Kumari Amrita GP3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 22-06-2020 The matter has been listed today for consideration through Video Conferencing.

Learned counsel representing the petitioner and the State are appearing and making submissions from their residence. The Court Master and Secretary are also part of this virtual court proceedings from their homes, all with the aid of audio visual technology.

It is submitted by the petitioner's counsel that he would be satisfied if the petitioner's representation claiming posting in

Patna High Court CWJC No.19827 of 2019(3) dt.22-06-2020 2/2 the District of Bhojpur in Clerical Cadre , (Annexure-6) is disposed off by the Respondent No.4 The petitioner does not claim any adjudication in the instant case.

Counsel for the State submits that the representation would have been disposed off, but for the fact that from perusal of Annexure-6 it cannot be concluded that the representation were ever received in the office of Respondent no.4 as the same does not bear any receiving. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court would observe that petitioner may approach the Respondent no.4, by a fresh representation within a period of two (02) weeks. In case such representation is filed, the Respondent No.4 would be obliged to consider the petitioner's claim in accordance with law within a period of eight (08) weeks thereafter.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) shyambihari/- U