Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Patna High Court - Orders

Urmila Sharma vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 29 August, 2012

Author: Shiva Kirti Singh

Bench: Shiva Kirti Singh, Vikash Jain

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
         Letters Patent Appeal No.1167 of 2012
                             --------
       Appeal against the judgment and order dated 24-4-
       2012 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2936 of 2012.
======================================================
Urmila Sharma, W/o Sri Narendra Kumar Sharma, R/o Par
Nawada Devisthan, P.S. Nawada, Dist. Nawada... Appellant
                         Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Director, I.C.D.S. Bihar, Patna Directorate, Social
   Welfare Department, Govt of Bihar,Indira Bhawan,Patna.
3. The Deputy Director, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of
   Bihar, Indira Bhawan, Patna.
4. The Deputy Director, Welfare, Magadh Division, Gaya.
5. The Divisional Commissioner,Magadh Division, Gaya.
6. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad.
7. The Child Development Project Officer, Barun,
   Aurangabad..................................................Respondents.


======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s      :       Mr. Navjot Yeshu
For the Respondent/s         :   Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
          and
          HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH)
 2          Patna High Court LPA No.1167 of 2012 (2) dt.29-08-2012

                                                   2/2




2     29-08-2012

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the order of the writ court under appeal.

The writ court has taken note of the fact that as per offer of appointment the joining time was within one week from .9-5- 2006 whereas the appellant claims to have submitted his joining on 8-10-2007. The writ petition was filed after a considerable delay in 2012. Admittedly the appellant will complete the age of 60 years in the next year as appears from the submission of the learned counsel.

We find no good reason to interfere with the order of the writ court. The appeal is dismissed.

(Shiva Kirti Singh, J) (Vikash Jain, J) Naresh/-