← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/2041/2020disposed

Md. Ishaque, v. The State Of Bihar

2020-02-19Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2041 of 2020 ====================================================== Md. Ishaque, Son of Late Md. Sadique, Resident of Village- Islamia Chowk Gang Jala, P.S.- Saharsa District- Saharsa.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar .

2.

The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The District Education Officer, Supaul.

5.

The District Programme Officer (Establishment) Supaul. 6.

The District Treasury Officer, Supaul.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Prabhat Ranjan Singh, AC to AAG 15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 19-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner was appointed in 1976, he was not granted the benefit of financial up-gradation in terms of the ACP/MACP Scheme. He submits that such benefits have been granted to the others but the petitioner has been discriminated. He has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure-6 to substantiate that petitioner has approached the respondents for redressal of his grievances and his representation is pending. Considering the fact that representation of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.2041 of 2020(2) dt.19-02-2020 2/2 petitioner is pending before the District Education Officer, Supaul, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the District Education Officer, Supaul to examine the claim of the petitioner and if the petitioner's claim is covered by the Scheme of ACP/MACP and persons similarly situated or junior to the petitioner have been granted such benefit, the same treatment should also be extended to the petitioner. Necessary decision in this regard must be taken by the respondents within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) spandey/- U