SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Pat) 838

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Aman Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjay Kumar.
For the Respondent: Mr. Subhash Chandra Mishra.

Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J.—The case is being taken up from defect side.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to submit the original petition along with attested affidavits and also remove all the defects pointed out by the Registry within two weeks from today.

3. The petitioner by way of this writ petition assails the order dated 25.01.2022, whereby the entire counselling conducted in the district of 52 Employment Units was canceled, on the basis of recommendations made by the three Members Committee, which conducted the enquiry to the complaint relating to the counselling conducted by the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Purnia.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, if there is a fault at the level of the officers, the petitioner should not be made to suffer as he has participated in the counselling and was offered appointment accordingly.

5. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner could not get a proper opportunity to appear for the re-counselling conducted on 28.01.2022.

6. I have considered the submission and perused the report submitted by the three Members Committee, relating to the 52 Employment Unit in the District of Purnia, thi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top