CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Anand Kumar Prasad vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 5 July 2012 · Citation: (2012) 07 JH CK 0126

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (S) No. 112 of 2010
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 344 words

D.N. Patel

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that suffice it will be for disposal of this writ petition, if a direction is given to respondent no. 2 to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide the claim of the petitioner, by passing a detailed speaking order, in accordance with law and within stipulated time, as given by this Court. I have heard learned counsel for the respondents, who has submitted that they have no much objection, if such a direction is given to respondent no. 2 to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide the claim of the petitioner, by passing a detailed speaking order, in accordance with law and within stipulated time, as given by this Court.

2.

In view of these submissions, I hereby direct respondent no. 2 (Deputy Commissioner-cum-President Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Koderma) or any officer, who is well conversant with the facts and law or any authorized and competent officer, appointed by respondent no. 2, to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide the claim of the petitioner, by passing a detailed speaking order, in accordance with law, rules, regulations, polices and Government enforceable orders, applicable to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and practicable, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order of this Court, after giving an adequate opportunity of being heard to the petitioner or to his representative. I also direct respondent no. 2 to appreciate the recommendation made by respondent no. 3, which is at Annexure-5 to the memo of the petition as well as the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 1550 of 2006 dated 30th July, 2007, which is at Annexure-7 Series to the memo of the petition.

3.

If the decision is taken in favour of the present petitioner, necessary benefit of the decision will be extended to him within further period of four weeks, thereafter. In view of the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of.