Dilip Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1007597
CourtJharkhand High Court
Decided OnAug-13-2013
AppellantDilip Kumar Singh
RespondentState of Jharkhand and ors
Excerpt:
in the high court of jharkhand at ranchi w.p.(s). no. 1287 of 2011 dilip kumar singh .... petitioner versus state of jharkhand & others ..... respondents ---------- coram: honble mr. justice aparesh kumar singh for the petitioner : dr. s.n.pathak for the respondents :j.c. to g.p.iv i.a. no. 4558 o”03. 13.08.2013 the instant i.a. has been filed for early hearing of the matter in the stage of admission itself. it is the grievance of the petitioner that he has been prematurely retired on 31.1.2011 showing his date of birth as 2.1.1951 wrongly instead of 2.1.1952. however, it appears that the petitioner has preferred the instant writ application in march, 2011 after having superannuated on that basis. it also appears that the other grievance now subsisting for the petitioner is in relation to post retiral dues. however, no ground for early hearing is made out. in that view of the matter, let the case appear in its usual course. i.a. no. 4558 of 2013 stands rejected. (aparesh kumar singh, j.) a. mohanty
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 1287 of 2011 Dilip Kumar Singh .... Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand & others ..... Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : Dr. S.N.Pathak For the Respondents :J.C. to G.P.IV I.A. No. 4558 o”

03. 13.08.2013 The instant I.A. has been filed for early hearing of the matter in the stage of admission itself. It is the grievance of the petitioner that he has been prematurely retired on 31.1.2011 showing his date of birth as 2.1.1951 wrongly instead of 2.1.1952. However, it appears that the petitioner has preferred the instant writ application in March, 2011 after having superannuated on that basis. It also appears that the other grievance now subsisting for the petitioner is in relation to post retiral dues. However, no ground for early hearing is made out. In that view of the matter, let the case appear in its usual course. I.A. No. 4558 of 2013 stands rejected. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) A. Mohanty