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

HIGH COURT OF PATNA
RAJESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR and ORS – Respondent
L.P.A 1528 2012



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1528 of 2012

In

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8616 of 2007

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

Rajesh Kumar, S/o Shree Awadh Lal Rai, R/o Village- Muraul, P.S. Sakara,

District- Muzaffarpur

.... .... Petitioenr … Appellatn

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District and Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur

3. The Registrar, Civil Court, Muzaffarpur

4. The Registrar General, Patna High Court, Patna

.... .... Respondents / Respondents.

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

Appearance:

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Neeraj Kumar @ Sanidh, Advocate.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Subhash Pd. Singh, GA 7

Mrs. Kiran Kumari, AC to GA 7.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

ORAL ORDER

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

3

17-12-2012

Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated

20th March 2012 passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No.

8616 of 2007, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under

Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.

The appellant, an applicant for appointment to the

post of Clerk in Civil Court, Muzaffarpur, pursuant to the

advertisement published on 20th August 2003, was selected and

placed at Sl. No. 4 in the wait list. Under the Writ Petition, he has

claimed a right to appointment as the first three persons in the wait

list had been issued appointment order and one of the said three

Patna High Court LPA No.1528 of 2012 (3) dt.17-12-2012

Page 2 of 2

persons did not accept the appointment. As a necessary

consequence, the appellant sought appointment as a Clerk.

The learned single Judge has dismissed the Writ

Petition. Therefore, this Appeal.

We see no merit in this Appeal.

Appeal is dismissed in limine.

Dilip.

(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