NAVIN SINHA
Vinod Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner is a Statistical Supervisor. He was posted in the office of the District Education Officer at Biharsharif in the district of Nalanda. On 9.3.2006 at Annexure-1, a communication was issued by the Deputy Collector Incharge of the Public Grievances Cell addressed to the District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda, that complaints have been received against the petitioner. He should, therefore, be transferred out of the District Headquarters with a compliance report to be submitted. Annexure-2, dated 16.3.2006 then came to be issued by the District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda stating that on direction of the Deputy Collector Incharge dated 9.3.2006 the petitioner was deputed to the office of the Sub-Divisional Education Officer, Hilsa. Thereafter, an order dated 14.7.2006 at Annexure-3 came to be issued from the office of the District Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif by which the services of the petitioner were transferred to the office of the Regional Deputy Director, Patna Division, Patna.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an employe
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.