Patna High CourtCWJC/5600/2018disposed

Mala Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-05-15Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5600 of 2018 ====================================================== Mala Kumari W/o Dayashankar Kishore Nishad & D/o late Mahendra Sahni R/o Village- Simra, P.O. Srikant, P.S. Piyar, District- Muzaffarpur, PIN843115 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Commissioner of the Division, Tirthut Division, Muzaffarpur.

4. District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

5. Sub Divisional Officer (West)-Cum-Authorised Inquiring Officer, Muzaffarpur.

6. Regional Deputy Director, Education, Tirhut Region, Muzaffarpur.

7. District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur.

8. District Programme Officer(Establishment), Muzaffarpur.

9. Block Education Officer, Mushari, Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajit Narayan Lall, Advocate Smt.Nirmala Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar AC to G.P-23 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 15-05-2018 Heard Mr. Lall, learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The issue raised in the present writ application is squarely covered by the judgment of the LPA Court in LPA No. 501 of 2017 dated 14.11.2017. This court has also considered the similar matter and passed order in the light of Division Bench Judgment passed in LPA No. 501 of 2017 dated 14.11.2017.

Considering the above, the writ petition is disposed of

Patna High Court CWJC No.5600 of 2018(2) dt.15-05-2018 2/2 in the light of decision of the LPA Court in LPA No. 501 of 2017 dated 14.11.2017 in similar terms and direction to the respondents to proceed in accordance with law after reinstating the petitioner.

It is made clear that for the intervening period, no salary will be paid to the petitioner. The salary of the petitioner would depend upon the final outcome of the enquiry conducted by the respondents so far it relates to the petitioner. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Ravi/- (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) U