Patna High Court
Md. Razi Ahmad Khan vs The Bihar State Power Holding Company ... on 11 February, 2025
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4580 of 2016
======================================================
Md. Razi Ahmad Khan, Son of Late Md. Salim Khan, Residing at Flat No. T-
6, Tazzin Apartment, Al- Aziz Complex, Chitkohara, PO and PS-
Gardanibagh, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited through its chief
Managing Director, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna
2. The Secretary, Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Vidyut
Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna
3. The Deputy General Manager (HR and Administrative), Bihar State Power
Holding Company Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna
4. The Chief Engineer, (O and M), Electrical Maintenance, Bihar State Power
Holding Company Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna
5. The Under Secretary, Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Vidyut
Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bajarangi Lal, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 11-02-2025
Re. Interlocutory Application No.01/2019,
Interlocutory Application No.02/2021 and Interlocutory
Application No. 03/2021.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents- Bihar State Power Holding
Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'respondent-
Company').
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Interlocutory Application No. 01/2019 has been filed to set aside
the decision of the Departmental Proceeding Committee, as
Patna High Court CWJC No.4580 of 2016 dt.11-02-2025
2/7
contained in Annexure - 11 of the Interlocutory Application as
well as Annexure -C to the second supplementary counter
affidavit.
3. Learned counsel further submits that Interlocutory
Application No. 02/2021 has been filed for the substitution of
the legal heir and representative of the sole petitioner, who
passed away on 11.05.2021 during the pendency of this writ
petition, leaving behind his widow, whose name is mentioned in
paragraph 3 of the said interlocutory application. A vakalatnama
has also been filed on behalf of the proposed legal heir and
representative of the sole petitioner.
4. Learned counsel further submits that Interlocutory
Application No. 03/2021 has been filed on behalf of the
proposed legal heir and representative of the petitioner, seeking
necessary amendments in relief relating to post retiral dues as
original petitioner died during pendency of writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he
has no objection to allowing Interlocutory Application Nos.
02/2021 and 03/2021. He further submits that Interlocutory
Application No. 1 of 2019 has become infructuous.
6. In view of the statement made in Interlocutory
Application No. 02/2021, the same is allowed. The petitioner is
Patna High Court CWJC No.4580 of 2016 dt.11-02-2025
3/7
directed to add the name of the substituted legal heir and
representative of the sole petitioner in the cause title of the writ
petition today itself. The Registry is hereby directed to correct
the name of the substituted legal heirs and representatives of the
writ petitioner in the cause title page of the writ petition.
7. This Court further allows Interlocutory Application
No. 03/2021, with a direction to the learned counsel for the
petitioner to insert the new prayer on the back of page 2 of the
main petition, making it a new page 2(A) during course of the
day.
Re. CWJC No. 4580 of 2016.
8. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents. .
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was an employee of the Bihar State Electricity Board,
Patna, which was subsequently restructured and renamed as the
Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited. The petitioner
was appointed as a Junior Electrical Engineer (General Cadre)
through Notification No. 434 dated 26.11.1984 and joined the
post on 14.12.1984. He was initially posted at M.R.T.
Jamshedpur.
10. Learned counsel further submits that during his
Patna High Court CWJC No.4580 of 2016 dt.11-02-2025
4/7
posting at Ranchi, the petitioner fell ill and applied for leave
from 21.10.1986 to 11.11.1986 for medical treatment, which
was sanctioned. However, while the petitioner was on sick
leave, Vigilance P.S. Case No. 33/1986 was registered under the
provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, in which the
petitioner was made an accused. The petitioner was granted
anticipatory bail by the Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court.
Subsequently, the petitioner was suspended vide Office Order
No. 1650 dated 31.03.1987. His suspension was later revoked
through an order dated 25.05.1991, issued by Memo No. 624.
11. Learned counsel further submits that after the
revocation of suspension, and at no point during his entire
service period, were any disciplinary or departmental
proceedings initiated against the petitioner, nor was any
punishment ever imposed upon him. The petitioner retired on
31.03.2010
as Junior Electrical Engineer, but despite his long
service, he was never granted any promotions, including
increments, time-bound promotions, or ACPs.
12. The petitioner submitted several representations
seeking consideration of his case, but no decision was taken on
these representations. The petitioner then filed CWJC No.
21056 of 2011, which was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh
Patna High Court CWJC No.4580 of 2016 dt.11-02-2025
writ petition for his claim relating to promotion, vide order
dated 19.12.2012. The petitioner subsequently filed CWJC No.
4721 of 2014, seeking time-bound promotions, selection grades,
ACP, and regular promotions to the posts of Assistant Electrical
Engineer and Electrical Executive Engineer. A final order was
passed on 08.09.2014, stating that if the petitioner files a fresh
representation before Respondent No. 3 regarding his claim, it
would be disposed of preferably within three months.
13. In response, the original petitioner filed a
representation on 11.11.2014. However, no order was passed on
his representation. Thereafter, the petitioner filed MJC No. 1276
of 2015. Meanwhile, by order dated 03.06.2015, communicated
to the petitioner via letter no. 483 dated 08.06.2015, the original
petitioner's claim for time-bound promotion, ACP, and regular
promotion was rejected on the grounds that he was disqualified
for the same. Consequently, the petitioner has filed the present
writ petition.
14. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other
hand, submits that the vigilance case in which the original
petitioner was an accused resulted into conviction. The
respondents further submit that the original petitioner is also an
accused in another criminal case.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4580 of 2016 dt.11-02-2025
15. In light of the developments which have taken
place during the pendency of the present writ petition, three
interlocutory applications aforesaid have been filed. It transpires
to this Court that the original writ petitioner passed away during
the pendency of the writ petition. Consequently, Interlocutory
Application No. 2 of 2021 was filed for substitution and has
been allowed today. The Court is of the firm view that, due to
the death of the writ petitioner, the situation has completely
changed. The widow of the original writ petitioner is now a
party at the place of original petitioner in the present writ
petition, seeking family pension and other benefits associated
with the writ petitioner.
16. From the pleadings and the arguments advanced
by learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that the
respondent-Company had not granted the reliefs sought by the
original petitioner on the grounds of the vigilance case
registered against him, in which he was convicted. However, the
situation has now changed as all the criminal cases and the
criminal appeal in which the petitioner was convicted have been
abated upon his death. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view
that keeping the present writ petition pending will not resolve
the issue at hand.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4580 of 2016 dt.11-02-2025
17. As such, without entering into the merits or
demerits of the case, the Court disposes of the present writ
petition with the following directions: The respondent is
directed to consider the claim of the petitioner (widow of the
writ petitioner), who is now entitled to the benefits associated
with her deceased husband, as he was an employee of the
respondent company. In this regard, the newly added petitioner
shall file a fresh representation before the Managing Director,
Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Limited, within 30 days
from the date of this order, along with a copy of the order,
claiming family pension and other dues. The respondent
authority is hereby directed to take a decision on the
representation within 90 days from the date of filing the same,
with a reasoned and speaking order. Furthermore, the
respondents are directed to pay the admissible dues of the writ
petitioner to his wife within the same 90-day period.
18. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
writ petition stands disposed of.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 13/02/2025
Transmission Date NA
