Patna High Court
Vinod Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 6 December, 2019
Author: Chakradhari Sharan Singh
Bench: Chakradhari Sharan Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.24331 of 2019
======================================================
Vinod Kumar S/o Shri Umesh Rajak Resident of Chaturbhuj Asthan, Mandir
Road, Muzaffarpur, P.s.- Mithanpura, Distt.- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
2. The Secretary S.C. and S.T. Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
3. The Mission Director Bihar Mahadalit Development Mission, 5th Floor,
Land Development Bank, Bihar, Patna
4. The Divisional Commissioner Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur
5. The District Magistrate Muzaffarpur
6. The District Pariyojana Officer-cum-District Welfare Officer Muzaffarpur
7. The Sub Divisional Officer East, Muzaffarpur
8. The Sub Divisional Welfare Officer East, Muzaffarpur
9. Muzaffarpur Nagar Nigam through its Municipal Commissioner,
Muzaffarpur
10. Vikash Kumar S/o Shri Sunil Rajak Permanent Resident of Mushahari,
Distt.- Muzaffarpur, presently residing at Batlar Quarter Road, Maripur, P.s.-
Kazi Mohammadpur, Distt.- Muzaffarpur
11. Prem Kumar Chaudhary S/o Ramdev Chaudhary Resident of Ward No. 38,
Rambag Road, P.s.- Mithanpura, Distt.- Muzaffarpur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjit Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.K. Singh, A.C. to S.C. 10
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN
SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 06-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The dispute relates to selection of Vikas Mitra under Dalit Vikas Mission, for Ward No. 41 under Muzaffarpur Municipal Corporation under guidelines issued by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Welfare Department, Government of Bihar.
Patna High Court CWJC No.24331 of 2019 dt.06-12-2019 2/2
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended that it is an essential requirement for a person to be the resident of the concerned Ward for selection against the said post. A tentative merit list has been prepared in which the petitioner has been placed at Sl. No. 3 whereas respondents No. 10 and 11 have been placed at Sl. No. 1 and 2 respectively. It is the petitioner's case that respondents No. 10 and 11 are not residents of Ward No. 41 and, therefore, they are not eligible for being considered for their selection as Vikas Mitra.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has admitted that no appointment has been made on the basis of the said tentative merit list prepared in 2016 so far. In my view, this application is pre-mature. The petitioner shall however have liberty to approach the appropriate authority raising his grievance against respondents No. 10 and 11, in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Department in this regard, at appropriate stage.
5. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) S.Ali/-
AFR/NAFR CAV DATE N.A. Uploading Date 10/12/2019 Transmission Date N.A.