Seeking remedy under Article 226 without exhausting other statutory remedy like appeal makes the petition premature: Patna High Court.
This case was filled by Manoj Kumar S/o Late Bharat Mandal Resident of Village – Bharthua Tola, P.S. – Aurai, District- Muzaffarpur against the State of Bihar. The Judgment in Manoj Kumar v. State of Bihar (Citation: CWJC No.3934 of 2021) was delivered by HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
This case was a writ Petition filled under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,1950. Through this petition the Petitioner wants the Court to issue an appropriate writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the Order dated 19.08.2020 vide Memo no. 1190/Est passed by the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in which he ordered for the dismissal of the petitioner from his services without giving any opportunity of being heard. Furthermore the petitioner also wants the court to issue an appropriate writ/writs, order/s, direction/s in the nature of for commanding/directing the respondents to re-instate the Mandamus petitioner back on the post of Clerk along with consequential benefits.
JUDGEMENT:
The Court dismissed the petition and held that Petitioner without exhausting statutory remedy of appeal against the order dated 19.08.2020 passed by the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur has rushed to this Court and hence the present petition is premature. Further the court reserved the liberty to the petitioner to prefer appeal before the Appellate Authority. If such appeal is filed, the same shall be considered within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such appeal.
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY AKANKSHA