Kameshwar Prasad Yadav vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 21 August, 2014

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Kameshwar Prasad Yadav vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 21 August, 2014

Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 WP(S) No. 5986 of 2010
                                           
            Kameshwar Prasad Yadav                ...   ...   Petitioner
                                        Versus
            The State of Jharkhand and ors.       ...   ... Respondents
                                           
            CORAM :      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
                                             
            For the Petitioner          :Mr. Rahul Kumar
            For the Respondents         :JC to GP IV & Mr. S.Srivastava
                                             

7 21.08.2014     I.A.No.4324 of 2014

                  The petitioner seeks to challenge the recommendation of the

            Departmental Screening Committee dated 15.5.2014 whereunder the benefit

            of ACP has been denied to him on account of pendency of a criminal case. It is

            submitted that as per the DPC minutes, petitioner is entitled to first ACP w.e.f.

            9.8.1999

but on account of pendency of a criminal case, he has been declared unfit. It is submitted that the date on which the petitioner has been found entitled i.e. 9.8.1999, there were no chargesheet filed against him by the prosecuting agency nor was any chargesheet in the departmental proceeding issued against him nor he was under suspension. He has relied upon a judgment rendered in the case of Union of India Vs. K.V. Jankiraman & ors, reported in 1991(4) SCC 109. It is submitted that, therefore, the aforesaid decision of the DPC needs to be challenged in the instant writ petition where he has sought a claim for the benefit of ACP.

Counsel for the respondentState supports the proceedings of the DPC and submits that the case of the petitioner was considered but not found fit on account of pendency of a criminal case relating to fodder scam against him, which was instituted in the year 1996 itself.

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since the proposed amendments are in relation to the main prayer made in the writ petition, therefore, in order to avoid multiplicity of the proceedings, the instant prayer is allowed to be incorporated in the main writ petition.

Let the said amendment be incorporated at the relevant places in the main writ petition by the learned counsel for the petitioner by filing an amended writ petition also indicating the places where amendments are being carried out in the original writ petition, within a period of one week with 2. a copy to other side.

The respondents are at liberty to file response to the amended writ petition within three weeks thereafter.

I.A. no.4324 of 2014 stands disposed of accordingly. WP(S) No. 5986 of 2010 List this case after four weeks.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. ) Pandey

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court