Patna High CourtCWJC/329/2018disposed

Mamta Kumari And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-01-24Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.329 of 2018 ======================================================

1. Mamta Kumari W/o Shri Subhash Chandra, resident of VillageBhimalpur, P.O.- Yashodha Math, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur.

2. Babli Kumari, S/o Shri Suresh Yadav, resident of Village- Kharihaniya, P.O.- Rampur, P.S.- Paru, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur. null null

2. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

3. The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur.

4. The District Program Officer, (Establishment), Muzaffarpur.

5. The Block Development Officer-Cum- Member Secretary Panchayat Teacher Employment Committee Unit Ginjas, Block- Sariya, DistrictMuzaffarpur. null null

6. The Block Education Officer, Block- Sariya, District- Muzaffarpur.

7. Mukhiya of Panchat Barjee, Block- Motipur, District- Muzaffarpur.

8. Mukhiya Cum- Chairman Gram Panchayat- Ginjas, Block- Sariya, District- Muzaffarpur.

9. Panchayat Secretary, Panchayat Ginjas, Block- Sariya, DistrictMuzaffarpur. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashutosh Singh, Advocate Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey -Aag15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 24-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by a decision of this court passed in LPA No. 501 of 2017 (Annexure-6).

Without going to the merit of the case, the writ

Patna High Court CWJC No.329 of 2018 (2) dt.24-01-2018 2/2 petition is disposed of with direction to the District Programme Officer (Estb.), Muzaffarpur who shall examine the case of the petitioners in the light of the decision in LPA No. 501 of 2017 dated 14.11.2017 and in case, the respondent District Programme Officer (Estb.) on scrutiny of the document finds that the case of the petitioners similar to the appellant in LPA No. 501 of 2017 similar benefit should be extended to the present petitioners. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the claim of the petitioners, it shall be the obligation of the respondent District Programme Officer (Estb.) to examine the record and decide the claim of the petitioners. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Ravi/- U