Patna High Court
Pankaj Soni vs The State Of Bihar on 14 February, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10697 of 2021
======================================================
1. Pankaj Soni S/o-Shri Vijay Soni Resident of Ward No.-3, Shiv Mandir, Ram
Nagar, P.O.-P.S.-Ram Nagar, District-West Champaran.
2. Sanjay Kant Mani Tiwari S/o-Late Vasudeo Mani Tiwari Resident of
Village-Janerwa, P.O.-Areraj, P.S.-Govindganj, District-East Champaran.
3. Chandan Kumar S/o-Shri Kapileshwar Prasad Resident of Village and P.O.-
Nadda, P.S.-Bhairavganj, District-Wast Champaran.
4. Bageshwar @ Bhageshwar KUmar @ (Gender-Male), S/o Haresh Prasad
Resident of Village-Sareyan Ojha Toal, P.O.-Nauadih, P.S.-paharpur,
District-East Champaran.
5. Anjali Kumari D/o-Shri Anil Prasad Resident of Mohalla-Behind Amna
High School, P.O. and P.S.-Bettiah, District-West Champaran.
6. Khushboo Kumari W/o-Shri Jagat Kumar, Resident of Village-Sareyan Ojha
Tola, P.O.-Nauadih, P.S.-Paharpur, District-East Champaran.
7. Rani Kumari W/o-Shri Om Prakash Kumar Resident of Village-Dhangola,
P.O. and P.S.-Sugauli, District-East Champaran.
8. Shilpi Kumari D/o-Shri Ashok Thakur, Resident of Village and P.O.-
Dhekaha bazar, P.S.-Motihari, District-East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar the Principal Secretary, Departmetn of Panchayati Raj,
Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, department of Panchayati Raj, Govt. of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Disrict Magistrate, East Champaran,Motihari.
4. The Selection Committee of Accountant-Cum- Assistant Under the
Chairmanship of the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.
5. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, East Champaran, Motihari.
6. The District Provident Fund Officer, East Champaran, Motihari.
7. The Block Development Officer, Block-Banjariya, East Champaran,
Motihari.
8. The Block Development Officer, Block-Paharpur, East Champaran,
Motihari.
9. The Block Development Officer, Block-Areraj, East Champaran, Motihari.
10. The Block Development Officer, Block-Ramgarhwa, East Champaran,
Motihari.
11. The Block Development Officer, Block-Harsidhi, East Champaran,
Motihari.
12. The Block Development Officer, Block-Kotwa, East Champaran, Motihari.
13. The Block Development Officer, Block-Sadar, Motihari, East Champaran,
Patna High Court CWJC No.10697 of 2021 dt.14-02-2022
Motihari.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Shri Prakash Srivastava
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Kumar Alok (Sc7)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 14-02-2022
The matter is heard via video conferencing due to
circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.
2. In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the
following relief/reliefs:
"I. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding the Respondents No. 3 to 5 to not question the
appointment of the petitioners, because the petitioners were
appointed by virtual of advertisement issued by the
Respondent No. 2 on 25.07.2018 (Annexure - P/1) and
thereafter the Respondent No. 4 in its meeting dated
21.01.2019 selected the petitioners to the post of Accountant-
cum-I.T. Assistant, but the Respondents No. 3 to 5 without any
statutory authorization, questioned the qualification of
Intermediate of the petitioners.
II. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding the Respondents No. 3 to 5 to not question the
appointment of the petitioners, because the petitioners
successfully completed their Intermediate Examination from
Kendriya Mukt Viyaliyi Sikshan Sansthan, Lucknow, U.P. but
most disgracefully the communication made by Kendriya
Mukt Vidyaliyi Sikshan Sansthan, Lucknow, U.P. was fond
true, but subsequently declared no acceptable by the
Respondent Nos. 3 to 5.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10697 of 2021 dt.14-02-2022
III. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding the Respondents No. 3 to 5 to pay entire due
salary because despite of the fact that the petitioners are
continuing and discharging their duties, but they are not
getting salary since April, 2020.
IV. Any other relief or reliefs."
3. Petitioners were stated to have been appointed on
Accountant-cum-I.T. Assistant. Their presumption is that
respondent Nos. 3 to 5 are likely to question the petitioners'
selection and appointment to the post of Accountant-cum-I.T
Assistant. Such a writ of prohibition cannot be granted.
Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 have every legal right to question the
validity of selection and appointment of the petitioners, if they
fulfill the requisite conditions including locus standi. In the light
of these facts and circumstances, the present petition is not
maintainable.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
GAURAV S./-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date
Transmission Date
