High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Shankar Dayal Singh & Anr vs The Bihar State Pharmaceutical on 15 November, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Shankar Dayal Singh & Anr vs The Bihar State Pharmaceutical on 15 November, 2011
                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                          CWJC No.19762 of 2011
                   1.   Shankar Dayal Singh son of late Sudama Singh resident of Jaipur,
                        P.O. Baikunthpur, Buxar
                   2.   Shailendra Kumar Singh son of Late Ram Kripal Singh, resident of
                        Husena Bangra, P.O. Ansar (Chainpur), Siwan
                                                   ...Petitioner
                              Versus
                   1.    The Bihar State Pharmaceutical and Chemical Development
                         Corporation Ltd. Maurya Lok complex "A" 5 th Floor, New Dak
                         Bunglow Road, Patna through its Chairman.
                   2.    The Managing Director, Bihar State Pharmaceutical and Chemical
                         Development Corporation Ltd. Maurya Lok complex "A" 5 th Floor,
                         New Dak Bunglow Road, Patna
                                                         ...Respondents

                            For the petitioner      :Mr. S. K. Ranjan
                            For the Corporation     :Mr.Bipin Bihari Singh
                                           -----------

02. 15.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

Petitioners seeks appropriate direction upon the

authorities of the Respondent-Bihar State Pharmaceutical and

Chemical Development Corporation (for short „the

Corporation‟) for granting them permanence in service as

similarly placed employees have been considered and granted

the aforesaid privilege/status. Learned counsel submits that

matter may be disposed of in the terms in which CWJC No.

20832 of 2010 (Madan Mohan Jha vs. Bihar State

Pharmaceutical and Chemical Development Corporation Ltd)

and another analogous matter was/were disposed of by order

dated 30.6.2011 (Annexure-7).

Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the Respondent-

Corporation does not object to the aforesaid stand taken by the

petitioner.

Regard being had to the agreement at Bar, the

present application is also disposed of in the terms in which
2

CWJC No. 20832 of 2010 and another analogous matter

was/were disposed of.

Let it be recorded that this Court has not gone into

the merit of the claim raised in the application.

( Kishore K. Mandal )
hr