Ashok Kumar S/oGulab Chandra Prasad v. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Considering the fact that the order challenged in this writ petition dates back to 18.10.2011 and the petitioners have approached this Court after more than 12 years from the date of issue of the impugned order, I am not inclined to admit this writ…
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners For the Respondents ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 29-07-2024 Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Government Advocate (10) : : Heard learned counsels for the parties.
The order put to challenge by the petitioners in the instant writ petition is dated 18.10.2011, issued by the District Programe Officer (Establishment), Saharsa vide Memo No. 568 (Annexure-P/1 to the writ Patna High Court CWJC No.11171 of 2024 dt.29-07-2024 petition) whereby the petitioners have been removed from the post of Nagar Teacher on the ground that the teachers training certificate of the petitioners issued by the Gandhi Hindi Vidyapith, Allahabad is invalid.
Considering the fact that the order challenged in this writ petition dates back to 18.10.2011 and the petitioners have approached this Court after more than 12 years from the date of issue of the impugned order, I am not inclined to admit this writ petition exercising the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the same is hereby dismissed in limine on the ground of delay and laches. (Nani Tagia, J) Nishant/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date NAFR NA 29.07.2024 NA
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Patna High Court, on 29 Jul 2024. The bench was NANI TAGIA.
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.