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

2025 Supreme(Pat) 58

HARISH KUMAR
Mukesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Parijat Saurav.
For the Respondents: Mr. Krityanand Jha.

Harish Kumar, J.—This Court has heard Mr. Parijat Saurav, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Krityanand Jha, learned Advocate for the State.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved with the order as contained in Memo No. 1042 dated 18.06.2014 issued by the Chief Engineer, Minor Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, whereby the petitioner has been inflicted with the punishment of dismissal. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the order contained in Memo No. 7466 dated 17.10.2019 issued under the signature of the Under Secretary, Minor Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of dismissal, aforenoted, also came to be rejected. In sum and substance, the petitioner challenged the entire departmental proceeding, including the memo of charge as well as the enquiry report based upon which the order of dismissal has been passed.

3. The relevant necessary facts, as culled out from the materials available on record, are summarised hereinbelow:—

(i) The petitioner was duly appointed on compassionate ground on the post of Correspondence Clerk in the Minor Irrigation Division, Gaya. At the relevant t

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