Mahendra Narain Singh v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.315 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9245 of 2015 ====================================================== Mahendra Narain Singh son of Late Banarsi Singh, resident of villageMahna, Police Station - Barauni, District- Begusarai. ... ...Petitioner - Appellant/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India, New Delhi.

2. The Secretary, Department of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India, New Delhi.

3. The Chairman, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Barauni Refinery Division, Sadique Nagar, J.B. Tito Marg, New Delhi.

4. The Executive Director (H.R.), Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Sadique Nagar, J.B. Tito Marg, New Delhi.

5. The Executive Director, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, P.O.- Barauni Oil Refinery, District - Begusarai.

6. Personnel and Administrative Officer (H.R.), Barauni Refinery, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Barauni Oil Refinery Begusarai, Bihar. ... ... Respondents-Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Rabi Bhushan Prasad No. 1, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mrs. Kanak Verma, CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 30-04-2018 Seeking exception to an order passed on 05.02.2018 in CWJC. No. 9245 of 2015, this appeal has been filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.

Even though it is the case of appellant that in violation to the principles of natural justice, the termination of appellant's membership from Post Retirement Medical Attendance Scheme

Patna High Court LPA No.315 of 2018 dt.30-04-2018 2/2 was unsustainable, the learned Writ Court has found that there is no violation to the principles of natural justice. Even though learned counsel for the appellant submits that this finding of the learned Writ Court is erroneous, we find that the termination took place on 23.07.2003 and writ petition was filed after twelve years in the year 2015. Merely because a reply to the legal notice was given, the same would not give cause of action to the appellant to challenge the termination which took place in the year 2003.

Accordingly, finding to be inordinate delay in ventilating the grievance, we see no reason to make any indulgence into the matter. The appeal is dismissed.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) ( Sanjay Kumar, J) Sunil/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R CAV DATE N.A Uploading Date 01.05.2018 Transmission Date