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

HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Pravin Kumar Pankaj – Appellant
Versus
The Divisional Manager and Ors – Respondent
L.P.A 1949 2012



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1949 of 2012

In

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3680 of 2011

With

Interlocutory Application No. 8248 of 2012

In

Letters Patent Appeal No. 1949 of 2012

======================================================

Pravin Kumar Pankaj, son of late Ram Bilas Singh, resident of village-

Rajaura, P.S.-Begusarai Muffasil, District- Begusarai.

.... .... Petitioner/Appellant

Versus

1. The Divisional Manager (P & I.R.) LIC of India, Divisional Office,

Zero Mile, Bhagalpur.

2. The Senior Branch Manager, Begusarai Branch Office, Main Road,

Begusarai.

3. The Branch Manager, Branch Office, Main Road, Begusarai.

.... .... Respondents/Respondents

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Appellant

:

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha

Mr. Bhola Prasad, Advocate.

For the Respondents :

Mr.

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

ORAL ORDER

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

2

18-12-2012 Re.: L.P.A. No. 1949 of 2012 & I.A. No. 8248 of 2012:

This Appeal preferred by the writ petitioner under

Clause 10 of the Letters Patent arises from the order dated 8th July

2011 made by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 3680 of

2011.

The appellant seeks compassionate employment in

the respondent- Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter

referred to as ‘the Corporation’) on the premise that his father, a

Development Officer in the Corporation, died in harness. The

claim has been rejected as the appellant had crossed the age bar.

Patna High Court LPA No.1949 of 2012 (2) dt.18-12-2012

2 / 2

2

The challenge to the denial in CWJC No. 3680 of 2011 has been

rejected by the learned single Judge. Therefore, this Appeal.

We see no merit in this Appeal.

Besides, the Appeal is barred by limitation of 479

days. No sufficient cause has been made out for the said delay.

Interlocutory Application is rejected.

Appeal is dismissed as time barred.

Sujit/-

(R.M. Doshit, CJ)

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top