High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 01 PAT CK 0055

Dhananjay Kumar Singh vs State of Bihar and Others

Patna High Court · Decided on 27 January 2010 · Citation: (2010) 126 FLR 138 : (2010) 4 LLJ 759

HON’BLE JUDGES
Navin Sinha, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
C.W.J.C. No.16886 of 2009

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 367 words

Navin Sinha, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the State. The Petitioner is stated to be a contractual appointee as a Storekeeper under a welfare scheme of the State Government for dissemination of education amongst the weaker sections titled "Sarwa Shiksha Abhiyun ". The books alleged to be in his custody in his capacity as a Storekeeper were allegedly found thrown in a ditch. A show-cause notice is stated to have been given to him on the January 12 when orders dispensing with his contractual service before expiry of the tenure have been passed on January 14, 009.

2.

Counsel for the Petitioner urged that the show cause notice did not specify any time for filing of the reply and in any event the Petitioner was effectively given only one day to file his reply i.e., January 13, 2009, which is unfair and unreasonable on the face of it. Had he been given reasonable time, he would have relied upon the order of the District Magistrate dated September 14, 2009 in his defence.

3.

Learned Counsel for the State relies upon a Division Bench decision in Smt. Sajjan Devi and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Others, to urge that like Anganwari Sewika.the Petitioner was only an agent of the State Government for dissemination of certain welfare schemes of the Government for the Weaker Sections. He does not acquire the status of a Government servant and cannot claim protection and parity before removal like them.

4.

Even in the judgment relied upon by the State, this Court has given finding for compliance with the basic requirement of the principles of natural justice. This Court finds the grant of one day time only to the Petitioner as highly unreasonable.

5.

Let the Petitioner submits his reply to the show-cause notice dated January 12, 2009 within a maximum period of two weeks from today when the Respondent No. 3 is required to pass final appropriate order thereupon within maximum period of three weeks thereafter.

6.

The impugned order dated January 14, 2009, shall remain in abeyance till such time final order are not passed within the time indicated above.

7.

The application stands disposed with the aforesaid directions.