IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.3073 of 2008
BIPIN KUMAR THAKUR, S/O SHRI VISHWANATH
THAKUR, R/O VILLAGE-SAIDANPUR, P.O.-KHANJAHAN
CHAK, P.S.-LALGANJ, DISTRICT-VAISHALI.
...............PETITIONER.
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR.
2. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER,
VAISHALI.
3. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, LALGANJ,
DISTRICT-VAISHALI.
4. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT
RAJ SARARIYA, PRAKHAND-LALGANJ, DISTRICT-
VAISHALI.
5. SHRI SHASHI RANJAN SAH, S/O SHRI RAM BILAS
SAH, R/O VILLAGE-SAIDANPUR, PANCHAYAT RAJ-
SARAIYA, PRAKHAND-LALGANJ, DISTRICT-VAISHALI.
..................RESPONDENTS.
-----------
2 30.06.2011 Petitioner has challenged the order of
the Deputy Development Commissioner (for
short ‘D.D.C.’), as contained in Annexure-1,
on the ground of jurisdiction.
However, since the petitioner has a
remedy before the statutory Appellate
Authority constituted under the Rules, this
Court considers it appropriate for him to
approach the Appellate Authority for
ventilating his grievances. If he does so
within four weeks, the Appellate Authority
shall issue notice to all the concerned
parties, hear them and pass appropriate
orders in accordance with law, preferably
within a period of two months from the date
2
of receipt/production of a copy of this
order.
Only for the purposes of consideration
of the matter on merits by the Appellate
Authority, without being prejudiced by the
impugned order of the D.D.C., the same is set
aside. However, respondent no.5 whose
appointment was found valid by the D.D.C. by
the impugned order shall not be disturbed
from functioning, if he has already joined
pursuant to the same, till final orders are
passed by the Appellate Authority.
Arvind/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)