Ravindra Nath Thakur v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
- Bench
- R M DOSHIT, ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH
Outcome
Dismissed
The Appeal is dismissed in limine
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Operative part
Mr. Veena Rani Prasad & Mr. Vishal Saurabh, Advocates. For the Respondent nos. 1 to 4: ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Mr. S.R. Sharan, AC to AAG 5. HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 5 14-11-2013 Re. Interlocutory Application No. 2125 of 2011. Delay of 26 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Patna High Court LPA No.471 of 2011 (5) dt.14-11-2013 Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 471 of 2011. This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is preferred by the writ petitioner against the order dated 16th December 2010 made by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 4181 of 2010. On 23rd November 2006 the appellant was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Government Middle School, Lakhnaur, Madhubani. On 7th May 2007 he was coerced to give his resignation. Three years after the alleged resignation, the appellant has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in above CWJC No. 4181 of 2010 for a direction to the respondent authorities not to accept the resignation allegedly tendered by the appellant on 7th May 2007. The learned single Judge has not believed the appellant and has dismissed the Writ Petition. Therefore, this Appeal. We agree with the learned single Judge. The Appeal is devoid of any merit. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Dilip.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The Appeal is dismissed in limine
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
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.