Brindawan Singh vs The State of Jharkhand

Learned counsel Mrs. Nitu Sinha representing the Central Government and Mr. Vikash Kishore Prasad, learned State counsel, both submit that specific instructions, as sought for in terms of order dated 17.03.2017, have not yet been furnished despite correspondences made with the concerned Ministries / Departments. Copy of the order had also been communicated. Both of them seek some more time to come out with complete instruction in the matter.

The order dated 17.03.2017 is self speaking. The stand of the concerned Ministries / Departments of Union of India and State is of vital importance in addressing the larger issue involved here. That is why, Secretaries of the concerned Ministries / Departments were directed to furnish specific instructions within time to their learned counsel. This Court fails to appreciate as to why even after sufficient time given, they have not furnished complete instructions in the matter. However, this Court is inclined to give one more indulgence to the Respondent Ministries / Departments to furnish their instructions. If instructions are not furnished within a further period of four weeks, this Court would be constrained to pass appropriate orders against the Respondent Officers of the concerned Ministries / Departments on the next date.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that order of rejection of the application for change of name in the Matriculation Certificate has been communicated to them today, which is dated 28.04.2017. He also seeks time to challenge it by a separate interlocutory application.

Matter is accordingly adjourned to be listed on 16.06.2017.

Learned counsel for the Union of India and State would communicate the present order also to the concerned Ministries / Departments.