← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/323/2020disposed

Bishwanath Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

2020-02-13Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.323 of 2020 ====================================================== Bishwanath Pandey S/o Indra Deo Pandey Resident of Madhaul near Vikash Line Hotel, Susta, P.s.- Muzaffarpur Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur, presently posted as the College Librarian, M.P. Singh Science College, Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Principal Secretary Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.

The Director Higher Education Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4.

The Vice Chancellor Babasaheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 5.

The Registrar Babasaheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 6.

The Finance Officer Babasaheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur 7.

The Principal M.P.Singh Science College, Muzaffarpur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Smt. Shilpa Singh (Ga12) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 13-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would be satisfied if the representation contained in Annexure18 and 19 is disposed of. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is dispose of with a direction to the Vice-Chancellor of the University to take appropriate decision in accordance with law and dispose of the representation contained in Annexure-18 and 19 by

Patna High Court CWJC No.323 of 2020(2) dt.13-02-2020 2/2 reason and speaking order at the earliest, preferably within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

It goes without saying that consequential benefit of such decision must reach the petitioner within a further period of 30 days.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Ravi/- U