Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

The State of Bihar and ors Vs. Janki Gope

The State of Bihar and ors vs Janki Gope

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 13, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/974831

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Patna High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The State of Bihar and ors

Respondent

Janki Gope

Excerpt

.....learned single judge has considered the matter on its own merit and allowed the writ petition holding that the state ought to have accepted the age of respondent as per ascertaining the age of respondent in the medical report. we are not in agreement with the contention raised by the appellants that the writ petition ought not to have been allowed. state counsel has stated that the date of birth has been entered as 1947 in the service register. 2 however, the counsel for the state has not been able to produce any material to support his contention with regard to the date of birth of respondent in the year 1947. in absence of which the employer has to necessarily follow upon the report of the medical board. accordingly, the department has subjected him to the medical board and the age was ascertained by the medical board which was accepted by the state and now it cannot be disputed that such report of the medical board has not become final by saying that the date of birth is in the year 1947. considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to entertain this appeal. accordingly, this l.p.a. stands dismissed. (t. meena kumari, j.) s.a./kundan (gopal prasad, j.)

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No. 1626 of 2010 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 180 of 2008 ====================================================== 1. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary Home (Police) Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Nawada.

3. The Anchal Adhikari, Akbarpur, Distt. Nawada. .... .... Appellants. Versus Janki Gope, S/o. Late Baiju Mahto, R/o. Vill.- Maheshdih, P.S.- Akbarpur, Distt.- Nawada. .... .... Respondent. ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellants : Mr. B. S. Pandey, A. C. to A. A. G. VII. For the Respondent : Dr. Dayanand Jha, Advocate. =====================================================”

13. 01-2012 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent. The learned Single Judge has considered the matter on its own merit and allowed the writ petition holding that the State ought to have accepted the age of respondent as per ascertaining the age of respondent in the medical report. We are not in agreement with the contention raised by the appellants that the writ petition ought not to have been allowed. State counsel has stated that the date of birth has been entered as 1947 in the service register. 2 However, the counsel for the State has not been able to produce any material to support his contention with regard to the date of birth of respondent in the year 1947. In absence of which the employer has to necessarily follow upon the report of the Medical Board. Accordingly, the department has subjected him to the Medical Board and the age was ascertained by the Medical Board which was accepted by the State and now it cannot be disputed that such report of the Medical Board has not become final by saying that the date of birth is in the year 1947. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to entertain this appeal. Accordingly, this L.P.A. stands dismissed. (T. Meena Kumari, J.) S.A./Kundan (Gopal Prasad, J.)

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial