Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, ATUL S. CHANDURKAR, JJ
KAUSHAL KUMAR DAS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. leave granted; initial proceedings commenced. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. historical context of appointment and termination. (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 3. challenge to appointment validity referenced. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. further investigation ordered for due process. (Para 11 , 12) |
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Samir Ali Khan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent at length.
3. The present appeals arise out of the Judgment and order dated 24.09.2014 in LPA No. 1234 of 2011 and order dated 17.07.2017 in Civil Review No. 356 of 2014 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court.
4. The facts, to the extent they are relevant for disposal of the present appeals are that the appellant was initially appointed as a Signature Not Verified DigitaNlly sigonedn by-Medical Assistant on 15.03.1980 and his appointment came to Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2025.08.23
13:53:52 IST Reason:
be questioned on the ground that the person who has appointed him namely, the Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Purnea, did not have the power or authority to do so. Vide order dated 05.01.2006, the appellant’s services were terminated.
5
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
