BipIn Kumar Sinha and ors., Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.

BipIn Kumar Sinha and ors., ;amarendra Kumar Singh and anr. and Hari Madhaw Singh and ors. vs State of Jharkhand and ors.

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Jharkhand Decided Mar 23, 2005

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/516700

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/516700
Court: Jharkhand High Court
Judge: S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.
Decided On: Mar 23, 2005
Case Number: W.P.(S) Nos. 6655, 6798 and 6872 of 2004
Subject: Service
Disposition: Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988[C.A.No.59/1988] Section 166; [A.K. Patnaik, CJ, A.K. Gohil & S. Samvatsar, JJ] Application for compensation for personal injury Death of injured claimant subsequently for some other reasons Held, Claim for personal injury will abate on the death of claimant. Claim will not survive to ...

Key legal issue: Service
Outcome / disposition: Petition dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

BipIn Kumar Sinha and ors., ;amarendra Kumar Singh and anr. and Hari Madhaw Singh and ors.

Advocate Ritu Kumar, Adv. in W.P.(S) Nos. 6655 and 6798 and; Satish Kumar Deo, Adv. in W.P.(S) No. 6872

Respondent

State of Jharkhand and ors.

Advocate A.K. Sinha, A.G. and; H.K. Singh, S.C. I

Legal References

Reported In: [2005(3)JCR141(Jhr)]

Excerpt

- motor vehicles act, 1988[c.a.no.59/1988] section 166; [a.k. patnaik, cj, a.k. gohil & s. samvatsar, jj] application for compensation for personal injury death of injured claimant subsequently for some other reasons held, claim for personal injury will abate on the death of claimant. claim will not survive to his legal representative except as regards claim for pecuniary loss to estate of claimant.orders.j. mukhopadhaya, j.1. in all these three cases the petitioners have challenged common notification contained in memo nos. 4891 and 4898 both dated 11.12.2004. by the aforesaid notification the petitioners have been posted as assistant engineers.2. the main grievance of the petitioners is that they have been reverted from the higher post of executive engineer to the lower post of assistant engineer, though they were eligible and fit to hold the post of executive engineers.3. counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have already been found fit by the selection committee for regular posts of executive engineers and vigilance clearance has been given. in-spite of that instead of granting them promotion to the post of regular executive engineer, they were given charge of executive engineer and later on sent back to the lower post of assistant engineer.4. admittedly the petitioners have not been promoted to the higher post of executive engineer. they were merely given charge of executive engineer. after cadre was bifurcated and allocation of the state, regular executive engineers having been posted in the department, the state government has issued the notification, posting those regular executive engineers against the posts of executive engineers, of which the petitioners were merely holding charge.5. in the above circumstance this court is not inclined to interfere with the notification dated 11.12.2004, as the petitioners have no right to hold such posts, however, this order shall not stand in the way of the petitioners for consideration of their cases for regular promotion to the. higher post of executive engineers if they have been declared fit for promotion by the public service commission/departmental promotion committee.the petitioners may approach the concerned officers of the state government for such relief. the writ petitions stand dismissed with the aforesaid observation.

Full Judgment

ORDER

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

1. In all these three cases the petitioners have challenged common notification contained in Memo Nos. 4891 and 4898 both dated 11.12.2004. By the aforesaid notification the petitioners have been posted as Assistant Engineers.

2. The main grievance of the petitioners is that they have been reverted from the higher post of Executive Engineer to the lower post of Assistant Engineer, though they were eligible and fit to hold the post of Executive Engineers.

3. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have already been found fit by the Selection Committee for regular posts of Executive Engineers and vigilance clearance has been given. In-spite of that instead of granting them promotion to the post of regular Executive Engineer, they were given charge of Executive Engineer and later on sent back to the lower post of Assistant Engineer.

4. Admittedly the petitioners have not been promoted to the higher post of Executive Engineer. They were merely given charge of Executive Engineer. After cadre was bifurcated and allocation of the State, regular Executive Engineers having been posted in the Department, the State Government has issued the notification, posting those regular Executive Engineers against the posts of Executive Engineers, of which the petitioners were merely holding charge.

5. In the above circumstance this Court is not inclined to interfere with the notification dated 11.12.2004, as the petitioners have no right to hold such posts, However, this order shall not stand in the way of the petitioners for consideration of their cases for regular promotion to the. higher post of Executive Engineers if they have been declared fit for promotion by the Public Service Commission/Departmental Promotion Committee.

The petitioners may approach the concerned Officers of the State Government for such relief. The writ petitions stand dismissed with the aforesaid observation.

Same Court & Year Jharkhand · 2005 Same Parties BipIn Kumar Sinha and ors., ;amarendra Kumar Singh and anr. a... Same Subject Service Same Judge S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

Service