Ram Snehi Singh @ Ram Saneh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.221 of 2023 ====================================================== Ram Snehi Singh @ Ram Saneh Singh Son of Late- Rup Narayan Singh, resident of Village- Gajhanda, P.S.- Nabinagar, Pipra, District- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Main Secretariat, Patna.

2.

Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Main Secretariat, Patna.

3.

Director, Directorate of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), Indira Bhawan, 2nd Floor, Ramcharitar Singh Path, Boring Canal Road, Patna.

4.

District Magistrate Aurangabad.

5.

District Programme Officer, (ICDS), Aurangabad. 6.

Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Aurangabad. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kishore Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr.Braj Kishore Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Sangha Mitra Ghosh, AC to GA7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 25-02-2023 This Court has heard an identical matter being C.W.J.C. No. 213/2023 disposed of today with a direction to the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Patna (Respondent no. 1) and the Director, Directorate of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) (Respondent no. 3) to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench in LPA No. 608/2006 and other analogous matters, the judgment of learned coordinate Bench in C.W.J.C.No.10016/2007 (Bihar State Government Employee's Association and Others Vs. The State of Bihar and Others) and

Patna High Court CWJC No.221 of 2023(2) dt.25-02-2023 2/2 the Finance Department resolution vide memo no. 4691 dated 14.09.2020.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is similarly situated to that of the case of Chanarik Baitha therefore this may also be considered in the light of the aforementioned judgments.

Learned counsel for the State has no objection to a direction to the concerned respondents to consider the case of the petitioner accordingly.

This Court, therefore, directs respondent no. 1 and 3 to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the judgments referred hereinabove and pass an appropriate order within a period of three months from the date of receipt/communication of this order.

It goes without saying that in case the petitioner is found similarly situated with Chanarik Baitha, he would also be entitled for the similar relief as have been granted to the said Chanarik Baitha by learned coordinate Bench of this Court. This Writ Application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U