CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Sri. Dipak Kumar Thakur vs State of Bihar and Others

Patna High Court · Decided on 18 September 2003 · Citation: (2004) 1 PLJR 42

HON’BLE JUDGES
Narayan Roy, J
CASE NUMBER
C.W.J.C. No. 6920 of 1999
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

8 paragraphs · 353 words

Narayan Roy, J.—Heard Counsel for the parties.

2.

The Petitioner, by this writ application, seeks direction upon Respondent No. 2 to approve his appointment on the post of clerk in the office of the Sub-divisional Education Officer, Bagaha and also to pay his due salary with effect from 19.6.1995.

3.

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that by virtue of the order, as contained in Annexure 1 dated 16.6.1995, the Petitioner was terminated from the post of ad hoc teacher and was appointed and posted as clerk in the office of the Sub-divisional Education Officer, Bagaha. Learned Counsel further submits that the Petitioner thereafter joined in the office of the Sub-divisional Education Officer on 19.6.1995, but salary is not being paid by the authorities.

4.

From Annexure 2 of the writ application, it appears that the Sub-divisional Education Officer wrote to the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur, that the post of clerk is not vacant in his office. The Petitioner is said to have been appointed by virtue of. the order, issued by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur and he was posted in a place, where the post was not vacant.

5.

It is admitted fact that the Petitioner was posted in a place, where the post, of clerk was not vacant. At the same time, it also appears to me as to under what circumstances the Petitioner was appointed on the post of a clerk without following the procedures laid down for such appointment.

6.

In the given facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, I am hesitant in passing any positive order directing the authorities to pay salary to the Petitioner.

7.

However, the Petitioner may represent his case before the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur, Respondent No. 4, ventilating his grievances and in case, it is so done, the same shall be considered and disposed of by Respondent No. 4 in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of its filing.

8.

With the direction/observation aforesaid, this application is, accordingly, disposed of.