Sahjahan v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 10 Feb 2022
- Bench
- P B BAJANTHRI
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed off
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : : :
Mr. Madhubala Verma Mr. Ajay Kumar Verma Mr. Lalit Kishore (Ag) For the Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 10-02-2022 The matter is heard via video conferencing due to circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.
State counsel accepts notice for respondent Nos. 1 to 7.
Service of notice to respondent No. 8 is dispensed since no adverse order is passed.
In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following relief/reliefs: Patna High Court CWJC No.7327 of 2021 dt.10-02-2022
That by this writ application, the petitioner craves indulgence of this Hon’ble Court for issuance of appropriate writ/direction/order to the respondents for appointment of the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sewika in Gram Panchayat Raj Dema, Ward No. 9, Centre No. 9, Block – Parsauni, District- Samastipur after cancelling the appointment of Respondent No. 8 who has been illegally appointed on the said post against the merit list by the respondents.
The petitioner without exhausting statutory remedy of appeal presented this petition and petition is not maintainable in view of the Apex Court decision in the case of State of Jammu and Kashmir V/s. R.K. Zalpuri and others reported in AIR 2016 SC 3006, Paragraph-20 which is held as under: “20. Having stated thus, it is useful to refer to a passage form City and Industrial Development Corporation V/s.Dosu Aardeshir Bhiwandiwala and others {(2009) 1 SCC 168}, wherein this Court while dwelling upon jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, has expressed thus:-
The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 is duty-bound to consider whether: (a) Adjudication of writ petition involves any complex and disputed question of facts and whether they can be satisfactorily resolved; (b) The petition reveals all material facts; (c) The petitioner has any alternative or effective remedy for the resolution of the dispute; (d) Person invoking the jurisdiction is guilty of unexplained delay and laches; (e) Ex facie barred by any laws of limitation; Underline Emphasized Patna High Court CWJC No.7327 of 2021 dt.10-02-2022 (f) Grant of relief is against public policy or barred by any valid law; and host of other factors
In view of the aforesaid decision present petition is not entertain able, therefore, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer appeal before the concerned Appellate Authority within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. If such appeal is preferred by the petitioner, the same shall be considered after giving ample opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as 8 th respondent – Ribha Kumari. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of appeal.
Operative part
Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed off. (P. B. Bajanthri, J) GAURAV S./- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed off
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Patna High Court, on 10 Feb 2022. The bench was P B BAJANTHRI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.