← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/23065/2019disposed

Seikh Mohammad Nazrul Hoda v. The State Of Bihar

2020-01-14Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23065 of 2019 ====================================================== Seikh Mohammad Nazrul Hoda Son of Seikh Najmaul Hoda At Present District Joint Hospital, Behind Gate School, Subhash Nagar, P.S.- Aurangabad (M), District- Aurangabad (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Additional Commissioner Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Director (Desi Chikitsa) Government of Bihar, Patna. 5.

The Director (AYUSH) Government of Bihar, Patna. 6.

The Principal Secretary Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

7.

The Principal Secretary Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

8.

The Joint Secretary (Desi Chikitsa) Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 9.

The Director (Desi Chikitsa) Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 10.

The Civil Surgeon-cum- Chief medical Officer Godda, Jharkhand. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Om Prakash Singh, Adv.

Mr. Jagjit Roshan, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Ms. Archana Sinha, AC to GP-25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner is a Medical Officer, Unani. It is his case that he had to remain in the Secretariat of Jharkhand after reorganisation of the State of Bihar awaiting cadre division from 15.01.2008 to 19.04.2008. He was allotted State of Bihar, whereafter he remained awaiting for posting from 22.04.2008 to

Patna High Court CWJC No.23065 of 2019(2) dt.14-01-2020 2/2 24.06.2009. These periods have not been adjusted/ regularised, the petitioner contends, despite several representations made to the department.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that even the State of Jharkhand has written to the State of Bihar on 26.05.2016 itself that the petitioner was awaiting division of cadre from 15.01.2008 to 19.04.2008, which period is required to be adjusted.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances, this application is disposed of with a direction that let the Director, Desi Chikitsa, Government of Bihar take a decision on regularisation/ adjustment of the periods, as noted above, as is being claimed by the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.

5. It goes without saying that the petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits once a decision is taken in his favour.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Rajesh/- U