High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Sitaram Singh Kushwaha vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 20 September, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Sitaram Singh Kushwaha vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 20 September, 2010
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CWJC No.15356 of 2005
                 SITARAM SINGH KUSHWAHA SONOF LATE RAM
                 DAWAR SINGH KUSHWAHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
                 JIGINI (DAMODARPUR), P.S. BHABHUA DISTRICT
                 KAIMUR.
                                          Versus
                        1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE
                           CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR,
                           PATNA.
                        2. D.G. CUM I.G. OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA.
                        3. A.I.G. (WELFARE), BIHR, PATNA.
                        4. A.I.G. (PERSONNEL), BIHAR, PATNA.
                        5. D.I.G. (HUMAN RIGHTS), BIHAR, PATNA.
                        6. S. P. KAIMUR AT BHABUA
                        7. D.I.G. HOMEGUARD, BIHAR PATNA.
                        8. COMMANDANT HOME GUARD, BIHAR,
                           PATNA.
                                        -----------

2 20/09/2010 This is the second visit of the petitioner. His

earlier writ application being C.W.J.C. No. 6858 of 2003

was disposed of with a direction upon the respondents to

consider the claim of the petitioner on the question of

granting certain benefits to him. A reasoned order has

now been passed contained in annexure-8. The order

states that there are no rules based on which the

petitioner can demand appointment as a constable or the

benefits merely because he received injury during the

course of so called performance of the duty because the

petitioner is or was a Homeguard and not holder of a

civil post as such under the respondent State. In absence
-2-

of any serious legal challenge to the reasons given in

annexure-8, no interference is warranted with the

impugned order dated 25.02.2004.

So far as the discrimination which is being

pleaded now by the petitioner in terms of his statement

made in paragraph 13 is concerned, a bald statement like

that does not make out a case of discrimination under

Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

This writ application is dismissed.

AMIN/                   (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)