Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1038 (PAT)

Rajeshwar Prasad Sinha v. State of Bihar

2015-08-14

AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI

body2015
JUDGMENT : The present set of facts of the case is a clear example of harassment meted out to a citizen, who also happens to be a government servant. Unfortunately, one limb of the State is harassing yet another limb of the State. Such harassment compelled the petitioners to approach the Court which was avoidable. 2. The State of Bihar had touted and notified Bihar Litigation Policy. That policy, it seems, has remained in paper because the bureaucrats’ mindset has not changed despite the policy of the State not to encourage litigations. 3. In the present case, claim of these petitioners has been rejected in terms of Annexure-12 dated 5th December, 2014, on the only ground that one of the petitioners was not a party to the previous writ, which was CWJC No. 18181 of 2012. Such a rejection is not arbitrary but also based on perverse logic and in breach of litigation policy. If this is how the governance is going to be done, then the Court will have serious reservation on the honesty and intent of the Government in reaching out to the citizen with their grievances, with the object of reducing litigations. 4. Learned AAG 14 has tried to justify Anneuxre-12 by taking a plea contrary to what has been indicated in Annexure-12 as the grounds for rejection. 5. The law being what it is, settled by the Apex Court in Mohinder Singh Gill’s case, a new plea, a new explanation contrary to the reasons assigned for rejection is obviously not entertainable nor justified. 6. The Court is left with no option but to quash Annexure- 12 and direct the Principle Secretary, General Administration Department to take a decision. In fact, the Court was inclined to impose exemplary cost of may be a lac of rupees on the State Government for the reasons indicated in the earlier portion of the order but on an earnest plea and assurance of learned AAG 14, the Court gives an opportunity to the State to revisit and redeem the situation. 7. Writ application is allowed. Annexure-12 is quashed. 8. Decision is required to be taken within four weeks from today.