Patna High Court: The Bench of Madhuresh Prasad, J. dismissed a civil writ petition filed by an employee who alleged that his services had not been regularized, but other ineligible persons had been regularized.
The instant petition was filed alleging that petitioner’s claim for regularization had been rejected by the respondent-authority (being Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department), on the ground that his work was found beyond the zone of consideration in view of limited available vacancies as per duly approved roster.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr Prabhat Ranjan Singh, submitted that ignoring the claim of the petitioner, others, who were ineligible, had been accommodated.
The Court noted that the stand taken by respondents in the counter affidavit had been disputed by the petitioner by making vague assertions. It was opined that stand of the respondents, appeared to be correct as no one, below the petitioner, had been considered for regularization on the panel prepared. Thus, the petitioner could not have any grievance of his claim being ignored in the process of regularization.
In view of the above, the petition was dismissed for being devoid of merits.[Ranjan Kumar Tanti v. State of Bihar, 2019 SCC OnLine Pat 238, Order dated 25-02-2019]