Satya Narayan Pandey vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3327 Jhar

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
              W.P.(S) No. 1580 of 2012
 (An application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
                            With
                     I.A. No. 6631 of 2019
                            --------

Satya Narayan Pandey ..... Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Jharkhand

2. The Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh

3. The Registrar, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh

4. Binod Bihari Mahto University ..... Respondents

---------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Shashank Saurav, Advocate

---------

Present:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

---------

Judgment

By Court: Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying for quashing and setting aside the order dated 01.02.2012 passed by the Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, whereby the petitioner's claim for promotion under the 1986 Time Bound Statute has been rejected.

3. Mr. Abhay Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now the issue involved in this case is no more res-integra inasmuch as in the case of Lal Krishna Kumar Nath Shahdeo vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors. in W.P.(S) No. 6558 of 2012 the issue has been settled as such the instant writ application may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned respondents and the respondents be directed to dispose of the claim of the petitioner in the light of the judgment cited hereinabove.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents does not have any objection.

5. In view of the limited submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant writ application is

hereby disposed of by giving liberty to this petitioner to file a fresh representation along with necessary documents and the judgments referred to hereinabove within a period of six weeks.

If any such representation is filed the same shall be disposed of in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Lal Krishna Kumar Nath Shahdeo (Supra).

It goes without saying that while passing the fresh order the competent authority will not be prejudiced by his previous order and decide the issue in accordance with law which has now been settled.

I.A. No. 6631 of 2019

6. In the light of final order passed in the writ petition, this Interlocutory Application also stands disposed of.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated: 08.09.2021 sm/N.F.R.