Patna High Court
Ravi Shankar Kumar Sinha vs The State Of Bihar on 17 February, 2025
Author: Partha Sarthy
Bench: Partha Sarthy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.377 of 2023
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18829 of 2016
======================================================
Ravi Shankar Kumar Sinha, Son of Late Sameshwar Prasad, Resident of
Mohallah- Awadhpuri, Road No. 4, Chandawa More, Ara, P.S.- Ara Nawada,
District- Bhojpur (Ara)
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Director, Account Administration and Self Employment, District Rural
Development Authority, Bhojpur.
3. The State Project Director, Bihar Education Project Council, Education
Bhawan, Patna- 4.
4. The District Collector, Bhojpur at Ara.
5. The District Education Officer, Bhojpur at Ara.
6. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Bhojpur at Ara.
7. The District Programme Officer Establishment, Bhojpur at Ara.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Lal Mani Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Kr. Ojha, Advocate
Mr. Ved Prakash Chandan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 17-02-2025
Re.- I.A. No. 2 of 2023
Patna High Court L.P.A No.377 of 2023 dt.17-02-2025
2/4
The learned advocate for the appellant/
applicant presses I.A. No. 2 of 2023 for condoning the
delay of eight months and one day in preferring this
appeal.
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the
delay of eight months and one day in preferring this
appeal is condoned.
3. I.A. No. 2 of 2023 stands allowed.
Re : LPA No. 377 of 2023
4. Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ojha, the learned
Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Apurva Kumar, the
learned Advocate for the respondent-State.
5. The appellant, who was a Data Entry Operator
and had joined the Bihar Education Project in the year
1988, continued to work till 31.03.2015. Thereafter, his
contract, which was to be renewed yearly, was never
renewed. Nonetheless, he continued to remain under
employment. However, because of his absence from the
place of work, he was issued a show cause notice to which
Patna High Court L.P.A No.377 of 2023 dt.17-02-2025
3/4
he had replied. The appellant claims to have been taken ill
and was advised bed rest. His services, however, has
been terminated on the ground that his work was
unsatisfactory.
6. The learned Single Judge did not interfere
with such termination order for the reason that the
contract of the appellant to continue as Data Entry
Operator in the Project, referred to above, ended on
31.03.2015
and it was never renewed.
7. All that the appellant would be entitled to is
his remuneration for the period that work was taken from
him but about such an entitlement, there is no averment
in the writ petition or in the appeal.
8. Considering the fact that the appointment of
the appellant was only contractual and the contract had
ended on 31.03.2015 whereafter it was never renewed
and the termination order was passed on 15.06.2016, no
case was made out by the appellant for any interference.
9. The judgment of the learned Single Judge,
Patna High Court L.P.A No.377 of 2023 dt.17-02-2025
therefore, is absolutely justified, requiring no interference
by us.
10. The appeal is dismissed.
(Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ)
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Rajesh/Saurabh
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 18.02.2025
Transmission Date
