Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 3272 of 2018 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2759 of 2016 ====================================================== Ajay Kumar Son of Late Sachidanand Sinha, resident of Mohalla- Biratpur, Dr. Dharnidhar Road, Post Office and P.S. and District- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Sri Deepak Kumar, Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.

2.

Sri Brajesh Malhotra, Principal Secretary Board of Revenue, Patna- 800001. 3.

Sri Jitendra Srivastava, Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya. 4.

Sri Rahul Ranjan Mahiwal, District Magistrate, Aurangabad, DistrictAurangabad. 5.

Sri Sudhir Kumar Jha, Deputy Collector, Establishment Collectoriate, District- Aurangabad.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Bhagat, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Lalit Kishore, AG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 26-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned Advocate General along with Mr. Mukul Prasad, learned counsel for the State.

2. Pursuant to order dated 02.09.2019, the District Magistrate, Aurangabad is present and has filed his show cause in which the stand is that the case of the petitioner has been considered and direction issued to the District Animal Husbandry Officer for making such appointment for which the Director, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department is competent, who

Patna High Court MJC No.3272 of 2018 dt.26-09-2019 2/2 also has been requested by letter dated 24.09.2019 to issue such letter. Copy of the said communication as well as the decision of the District Compassionate Appointment Committee dated 16.09.2019, have been brought on record. The officer, before the Court, in the presence of the learned Advocate General, submitted that within two weeks, the appointment letter of the petitioner shall also be given to him.

3. With regard to the earlier show cause, which was affirmed on 20.02.2019 and which contains patently incorrect and truncated facts, the officer submitted that indulgence may be given as the same was inadvertent.

4. Having regard to the unconditional apology tendered and the fact that the officer has undertaken before the Court that within two weeks appointment letter of the petitioner shall be given to him, the Court is inclined to grant him indulgence.

5. Accordingly, the application stands disposed off in the light of the undertaking given.

6. Personal appearance of the officer stands dispensed with.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T