ANIRUDHPRASADCHOUDHARY Vs. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
LAWS(PAT)-1996-2-32
HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Decided on February 28,1996

ANIRUDH PRASAD CHOUDHARY,RAJA RAM SINGH,INDRA NAND PATHAK,NAGENDRA NARALN SINGH,JIWAN TIGGA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF BIHAR,HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA,HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF PATNA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

QUINN V. LEATHEM [REFERRED TO]
TILLM AND CO. V. KANUTS LORD. [REFERRED TO]
THE KING V. SUSSEX JUSTICES [REFERRED TO]
REGINA V. LIVERPOOL CITY JUSTICES,EXPARTE TOPPING [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. V. BATUK DEO PATI TRIPATI [REFERRED TO]
VIVEKANAND GOSWAMI AND OTHERS V. STATEROF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
SIEMENS ENGINEERING & MANUFACTURING CO.,OF INDIA LTD. V. UNION OF INDIE [REFERRED TO]
SYED IQBAL ALI IMAM RAZA V. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
AMBICA QUARRY WORKS V. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
ALLAH V. FLOOD [REFERRED TO]
MAHABIR JUTE MILLS V. SHIBBAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
PRADYAT KUMAR BOSE VS. HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT [REFERRED TO]
HARINAGAR SUGAR MILLS LIMITED VS. SHYAM SUNDER JHUNJHUNWALA [REFERRED TO]
JYOTI PRAKASH MITTER VS. HONBLE JUSTICE H K BOSE CHIEF JUSTICE OF HIGH COURT CALCUTTA [REFERRED TO]
MADHYA PRADESH INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
TRAVANCORE RAYON LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
MANEKA GANDHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
M M GUPTA STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR:M M GUPTA:STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
A L KALRA VS. PROJECT AND EQUIPMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
J MOHAPATRA AND CO VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA UNION OF INDIA BISWAROOP CHATTERJEE ACHINTA KUMAR BISWAS NABENDU BOSE LAXMI NARAYAN VS. TULSIRAM PATEL:SADANAND JHA:G P KOUSHAL:UNION OF INDIA:STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. MAHARAJA DHARMANDER PRASAD SINGH:MAHARANI RAJLAXMI KUMARI DEVI [REFERRED TO]
GOODYEAR INDIA LTD VS. STATE OF HARYANA:GEDORE TOOLS P LTD [REFERRED TO]
SITARAM SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED U P STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ROHIT PULP AND PAPER MILLS LIMITED VS. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE BARODA [REFERRED TO]
S N MUKHERJEE VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. D T C MAZDOOR CONGRESS ANB [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
KARNATAKA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Y C SHIVAKUMAR VS. B M VIJAYA SHANKAR:B M VUAYA SHANKAR [REFERRED TO]
BAIKUNTHA NATH DAS VS. CHIEF DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER BARIPADA [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHAMSHER BAHADUR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
DESH BANDHU GUPTA VS. N L ANAND AND RAJINDER SINGH [REFERRED TO]
TATA CELLULAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
S RAMACHANDRARAJU VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. MAHESH PRAKASH [REFERRED TO]
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. MAHESH PRAKASH [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA BHUBANESWAR VS. SURESHCHANDRA BEHERA [REFERRED TO]
A K KAUL VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
S L SONI VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
K KANDASWAMY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
HOUSING BOARD HARYANA VS. HARYANA HOUSING BOARD EMPLOYEES UNION [REFERRED TO]
K PRABHAKARAN NAIR VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
GOONESINHA VS. O L DE KREISER [REFERRED TO]
SYED IQBAL ALI IMAM RAZA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA VS. R C JAIN [LAWS(PAT)-1996-8-78] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAMA CHARAN SINHA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2003-3-98] [REFERRED TO]
ARJUN CHAND VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1997-7-61] [REFERRED TO]
S M HAQUE VS. HON BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA [LAWS(PAT)-2000-3-95] [REFERRED TO]
NAWAL KISHORE PRASAD VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2000-3-82] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESH RAO VS. HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2012-12-74] [REFERRED TO]
BALMIKI PRASAD SINHA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2013-12-44] [REFERRED TO]
HARENDRA PRATAP SINGH VS. THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE [LAWS(PAT)-2011-5-176] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMAN RAM SON OF LATE DEDHARI RAM VS. HON&APOSBLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL [LAWS(PAT)-2010-4-683] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

B.L.Yadav, J. - (1.)By an order dated 25.1.1995 a Division Bench of this Court referred these analogous Writ Petitions to be heard by a larger Bench as they involve questions of law of far reaching importance, pursuant to that the Hon'ble the Chief Justice constituted this Special Bench. This is how these petitions have been placed before us.
(2.)Whether these analogous writ petitions preferred under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution would be maintainable, even though on administrative side while passing the impugned orders directing that the petitioners were not entitled to the enhanced age of superannuation from 58 to 60 years, every members of this Bench was participant in the deliberations of the Full Court and whether Doctrine of Necessity was applicable, and whether the impugned orders have been passed after following the procedure under Rule 3(10) of Rules of Patna High Court (for short the Rules) read with Rule 74 of Bihar Service Code (for short the Service Code) and what are actually the contours of the judicial review in such matters and whether under the facts and circumstances of the case petitioners are entitled to the enhancement of the age of superannuation (from 58 to 60 years), are the main questions that fall for our considerations. As these Writ petitions (hereinafter to be referred as 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th & 5th writ petition) involve similarly questions for our determination, hence it is convenient to dispose them of by a common judgment.
(3.)Relief sought in the 1st writ petition is for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 7th December, 1994 contained in letter No. 13568/XIX-31/94 dated 7th December, 1994 by which a decision of the administrative side of this Court through the Joint Registrar (Establishment) was communicated stating that the benefit of enhancement of age of superannuation from 58 to 60 years would not be available to Sri Anirudh Pd. Choudhary, the petitioner No. 1. The next relief is for issuance of a writ of manvamus directing the High Court to allow the benefit of enhancement of ge of superannuation from 58 to 60 ears to the petitioners.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.