Sangita Devi vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1506 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                       Letters Patent Appeal No.1385 of 2019
                                            In
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14829 of 2014
     ======================================================

Sangita Devi, Wife of Sri Hari Krishna Singh, Resident of Village- Chirailidih, PO- Chiraili Bazar, P.S.- Khijarsarai, District- Gaya.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director-in-Chief, Health Services, BIhar, Patna.

3. The Civil Surgeon - Cum Chief Medical Officer, Jehanabad.

4. The Civil Surgeon- cum - Chief Medical Officer, Gaya.

5. The In-charge Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Jehanabad.

..Respondents . ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.D.Yadav (Aag9) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 17-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The challenge is to the order dated 17.10.2019 passed

in C.W.J.C. No.14829 of 2014 (Sangita Devi Versus the State of

Bihar & Ors.).

In view of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble

Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.7879 of 2019 arising out of SLP

(Civil) No.11885 of 2012 (The State of Bihar & Ors. Versus

Devendra Sharma) with other analogous cases, we find no merit Patna High Court L.P.A No.1385 of 2019 dt.17-03-2021

in the present appeal and, as such, dispose of the same, also for

the reason that even otherwise the judgment rendered by the

learned Single Judge is based on correct and complete

appreciation of facts on record.

The petitioner filed the writ petition but did not

challenge the order of termination, as is evident from the

findings in paragraph 14 of the impugned order. Even otherwise,

now Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of State of Bihar &

Ors. Versus Devendra Sharma (supra) has clarified that no

person would be entitled for the benefit of rendering continuous

service, if the appointment is per se illegal/de hors the relevant

provisions, which fact is undisputed before us.

(Sanjay Karol, CJ)

( S. Kumar, J)

Sanjay/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          19.03.2021
Transmission Date       NA