The State Of Bihar v. Sushil Kumar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1126 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6977 of 2016 ====================================================== The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

Sushil Kumar and Ors son of Late Shiv Shankar Prasad Resident of Mohalla Sarvoday Nagar, P.S. Chatauni, District- East Champaran Motihari at working on the post of Accountant Investigation and Planning Division, G.A.D.A. Motihari 2.

The Deputy Secretary, Command Area Development Authority, Water Resources Department, Patna 3.

The D.D.C.-cum-Chairman, Gandak Command Area Development Authority, Muzaffarpur 4.

The Superintending Engineer I and II, G.A.D.A., Muzaffarpur 5.

The Executive Engineer, Investigation and Planning Division, Gandak C.A.D.A., Motihari 6.

The Assistant Engineer Planning, Incharge Accounts, Gandak C.A.D.A., Muzaffarpur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG 4 Mr. Sanjay Prasad, AC to AAG 4 For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) Date : 23-11-2022 Re: I.A. No. 6072 of 2018 Heard I.A. No. 6072 of 2018.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.1126 of 2018 dt.23-11-2022 2/3

2. For the reasons stated in the application and affidavit, delay of 130 days in filing L.P.A. stands condoned. I.A. No. 6072 of 2018 stands allowed.

3. The State preferred appeal against order of the learned Single Judge dated 26.03.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 6977 of 2016.

4. Core issue involved in the litigation is whether refixation of pay of the respondent and ordering recovery is in order or not? The learned Single Judge has taken note of Apex Court's decision rendered in State of Punjab and others vs Rafiq Masih White Washer and others reported in (2015) 1 PLJR (SC) 261. In fact he has extracted Paragraph 12, under what circumstances recovery can be ordered.

5. Despite the aforesaid judicial pronouncement, State has filed the present appeal. Perusal of the pleadings, it is evident that frivolous appeal is being filed, knowingly the judicial pronouncement insofar as re-fixation and recovery for the last seven years. Further recently Apex Court in the case Thomas Denial vs. State of Kerala and Others, 2022 Live Law (SC) 438 reiterated under what circumstances recovery can be ordered. Hence, the present appeal stands rejected with Cost of Rs. 5,000/-

Patna High Court L.P.A No.1126 of 2018 dt.23-11-2022 3/3 (Rupees Five Thousand). Cost shall be remitted in the Patna High Court Legal Services Committee, Patna High Court. (P. B. Bajanthri, J) ( Purnendu Singh, J) GAURAV S./- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 30.11.2022 Transmission Date