Patna High Court
Satish Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 4 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1686 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21694 of 2019
======================================================
Satish Kumar Son of Sri Kailash Prasad Singh, Resident of Village Nazardih,
PS. Kadirganj, Distt. Nawada.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Transport Department, Govt.
of Bihar, Patna.
2. Administrator, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation Pariwahan Bhawan,
Budh Marg, Patna.
3. Divisional Manager, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation Gaya.
4. Superintendent of Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Nawada Sub
Division, Nawada.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY)
Date : 04-10-2023
Heard the parties.
2. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been
preferred against the order dated 02.12.2019 passed in C.W.J.C.
No. 21694 of 2019 by which the prayer of the appellant-
petitioner for regularization of his service on the post of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1686 of 2019 dt.04-10-2023
Conductor/'Sambahak' in the Nawada Sub Division under Bihar
State Road Transport Corporation (henceforth for short 'the
Corporation') has been rejected.
3. The facts of the case in brief is/are that:
4. The appellant was initially engaged as
Private Agent at Railway Crossing Bus Stand, Nawada vide
letter No. 7456 dated 3.12.2010 of the Head office, Patna.
Accordingly, the Nawada office vide letter No 1653 dated
14.12.2010 asked its official to accept the deposit money and
issue tickets to him. Accordingly, he started working there.
5. The claim is that he continued working as
such till year 2016 and further increased the revenue of 'the
Corporation' for which he was also issued the appreciation
letter.
6. Later, he preferred application for
appointment under daily wages Labour in 'the Corporation' on
6.12.2015 with his matriculation certificate and other documents
which however remained pending.
7. The case of the appellant-petitioner that
while some outsiders namely Pramod Kumar/Ajay Kumar
having no work experience were taken in as daily wages Driver/
Conductor, his case has been ignored.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1686 of 2019 dt.04-10-2023
8. The appellant-petitioner claims that he
represented before the Administrator of 'the Corporation' as also
the Deputy Secretary of Transport Department, Bihar, Patna but
without any response.
9. Feeling discriminated, he preferred CWJC
No. 21694 of 2019.
10. The writ petition was heard by the learned
Single Judge on 02.12.2019 and after going through the petition
and submissions put forward by the parties, it was dismissed
with the following order:
"Heard both sides.
The petitioner seeks relief for
regularizing his service on the post of
Conductor/Sambahak in Nawada Sub-Division of
Bihar State Road Transport Corporation. The
petitioner was initially appointed as private agent
on booking counter but later on another person
was appointed as Conductor/Sambahak of Bihar
State Road Transport Corporation, Nawada Sub-
Division. The petitioner got maximum experience
but his case has not been considered.
On the face of it, it appears that
the petitioner was temporarily as ticket agent and
he has got no right to be appointed on the post of
Conductor/Sambahak in Bihar State Road
Transportation Corporation.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1686 of 2019 dt.04-10-2023
Having considered the facts
aforesaid, I do not find any merit in the writ
petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed."
11. Still aggrieved, the present appeal.
12. This Court has gone through the appeal as
also the order passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge. The facts
that emerges is/are:
(i) the petitioner was engaged as a Booking
Agent to sell the tickets in 2010;
(ii) from the record, it further appears that he
did serve well as a Booking Agent for which he also got
appreciation letter;
(iii) this however, does not entitle him to be
considered for being appointed as a regular employee;
(iv) the Writ Court taking into account the
aforesaid facts rightly chose not to extend any relief to him.
13. So far as the case of Pramod Kumar and
Ajay Kumar are concerned; no document is on record to show
the circumstances under which such benefits were extended to
them.
14. Having gone through the contents in the
appeal and the submissions put forward by the learned Counsel
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1686 of 2019 dt.04-10-2023
for the appellant as also the order passed by the Hon'ble Single
Judge dated 02.12.2019, we do not find any merit in the case.
15. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)
( Rajiv Roy, J)
Neha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 09.10.2023
Transmission Date
