Research › Browse › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

1995 DIGILAW 372 (PAT)

Shiva Jatan Thakur v. State of Bihar

1995-07-13

B.P.SINGH

body1995
Order Heard counsel for the parties. 2. I am not inclined to go into the various controversies raised in this writ application. It may be that the petitioner, an eminent person, and the Chairman of the Bihar Public Service Commission, also an eminent person do not see eye to eye in many matters. Having regard to large number of matters which have come to this Court it is obvious that there is no love lost between the two. The Court however, cannot go into all the problems, which the petitioner may face on account of displeasure of the Chairman of the Commission as alleged by him. However, so far as the right of the petitioner to perform his duty is concerned, no authority can be permitted to obstruct the petitioner in the performance of his duty and to that extent protection has to be given. So far as the utterance of the Chairman or his notings in the file are concerned, if they are defamatory the petitioner may seek his remedy in accordance with law either before the Civil Court or a court of criminal jurisdiction. 3. Mr. Shukla, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has prayed for only four directions from this Court to which Mr. B.C. Ghosh counsel for the Commission has no objection and accordingly those directions are being issued :- (i) It is hereby directed that the petitioner being a blind person and requiring the help of another person for his movement in the office, will be entitled to take with him two persons to his Chambers in the premises of the Bihar Public Service Commission. No one shall prevent any of those two persons from accompanying the petitioner, and it will be open to the petitioner to take such assistance from them as he considers necessary for his personal convenience. (ii) The petitioner will be given the same facilities as are given to other members of the Bihar Public Service Commission including the facility of official vehicle for official work. The Chairman of the Commission shall see to it that no distinction is made between the petitioner on the one hand and other members of the Commission on the other in such matters. (iii) The petitioner desires to record his minutes in his Chamber after the meeting of the Commission and after the interview held by the Commission. The Chairman of the Commission shall see to it that no distinction is made between the petitioner on the one hand and other members of the Commission on the other in such matters. (iii) The petitioner desires to record his minutes in his Chamber after the meeting of the Commission and after the interview held by the Commission. For this purpose he needs the assistance of his Personal Assistant. Since such minutes can not be dictated in the meeting hall or the interview hall, he has to give dictation to his Personal Assistant in his Chamber or at his residence. The Personal Assistant of the petitioner shall attend to him in Chamber or at his residence whenever required. The authorities of the Commission or the Chairman of the Commission shall not prevent the Personal Assistant of the petitioner from attending to him whenever required. Needless to say that if the petitioner wishes his P.A. to attend him at his residence necessary arrangement has to be made keeping in view the convenience of the petitioner as well as his P.A. and that is a matter which the petitioner must sort out with his P.A. The Chairman of the Commission or any other officer of the Commission will not interfere in this regard. (iv) The Chairman of the Bihar Public Service Commission and officers and authorities of the Commission are directed to receive the communication sent by the petitioner to them and not to return them without any reason. What action is required to be taken on such letter is a different matter altogether. 4. It is unfortunate that this type of litigation has come to this Court and certainly it tends to tarnish the image of the Bihar Public Service Commission. It is desirable that such litigations are avoided and for doing so the petitioner as well as Chairman of the Commission will have to make their best efforts to avoid such unfortunate litigations. 5. This writ petition is disposed of.