Manoj Kumar Chaurasia, v. The Bihar State Road Transport Corporation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 23147 of 2019 ====================================================== Manoj Kumar Chaurasia, Son of Kanhaiya Lal Chaurasia, Ward No. 40 Panch Mohalla - Bazar Gaya, P.S.- Civil Lines, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Bihar State Road Transport Corporation through its Administrator, Pariwahan Bhawan, Patna.

2.

The Administrator, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Pariwahan Bhawan, Patna.

3.

The Chief of Administration, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Pariwahan Bhawan, Patna.

4.

The Chief of Operation, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Pariwahan Bhawan, Patna.

5.

The Regional Manager, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Gaya. 6.

The Divisional Manager, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation Muzaffarpur.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr Suman Kumar Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 28-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order of punishment is without any proper calculation. The allegation of excess kilometer has not properly been assessed/calculated. The quantification of the diesel embezzled is also not in accordance with law. In respect of such issue, he submits that his review is pending consideration. The same is Annexure 6 of the writ petition.

Patna High Court CWJC No.23147 of 2019(2) dt.28-01-2020 2/2 Learned counsel representing the respondentCorporation submits that since the petitioner has availed the remedy of review, the resort to the instant proceedings is wholly unjustified.

From perusal of Annexure 6, it appears that review was preferred in July, 2017 itself.

In view of the objection raised by the respondentCorporation, this Court would only observe that the delay in disposing of the review has, perhaps, compelled the petitioner to approach this Court.

Without going into the said issue and in view of the objection raised by the respondent-Corporation, writ petition is disposed of with specific direction to the Administrator, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation (Respondent No 2) to dispose of the review (Annexure 6) by reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law expeditiously without any undue delay and preferably within eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U