Strange case of Abhay Kumar Sharma, four year delay by the State to comply with High Court's order

Abhay Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Bihar is listed for hearing on August 8, 2024 before the bench of Justice Anil Kumar Sinha of Patna High Court. The case was filed in the Court on December 3, 2015. It was registered on December 10, 2015. The first order of the Court passed by Justice Anil Kumar Upadhyay dated March 3, 2020 reads: "Respondents are directed to file counter affidavit positively by 30th March, 2020. Put up on 31st March, 2020 for admission." Besides the State of Bihar, there are five respondents. They are: Director, Primary Education, Bihar, District Superintendent of Education, Patna, Area Education officer, Bikram, Patna, Area Education officer, Sadar, Patna and Area Education officer, Danapur.

The Court framed the issue for the respondents. Its direction reads: "While filing the counter affidavit the respondents have to address the following issues, particularly with reference to Rule 97 and 99 of Bihar Civil Service Rules: (i) Whether any departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner; (ii) Whether any order of dismissal of the petitioner was passed by the respondents; (iii) How the respondent wishes to compensate the petitioner when he has been fully exonerated in the criminal charges as evident from the judgement of the Trial Court."

The direction makes it crystal clear that Abhay Kumar Sharma "has been fully exonerated in the criminal charges as evident from the judgement of the Trial Court". It asked the respondents to file an affidavit as to whether any departmental proceeding was initiated against Abhay Kumar Sharma, the petitioner, whether any order of dismissal of the petitioner was passed by the respondents and how the respondent wishes to compensate the petitioner. 

After four years of the first order of the High Court, in his order dated March 11, 2024, Justice Sinha wrote: "Despite the order, dated 03.03.2020, neither any counter affidavit has been filed nor learned Counsel for the State is present. By way of last chance, four weeks’ further time is granted to the State for filing counter affidavit, pursuant to the order, dated 03.03.2020. List this case, under the same heading, on 15th April, 2024. Let a copy of this order be furnished in the Office of the learned Advocate General, Bihar."

After more than four years, the respondent filed the counter affidavit on March 28, 2024. On 15-04-2024, Justice Sinha passed an order. It reads:"Two weeks’ time is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner for filing rejoinder affidavit. As prayed, put up on 30.04.2024." The order of April 30, 2024 reads: "Mr. Ram Jivan Prasad Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner prays for four weeks’ time to get ready in the matter inasmuch as the previous counsel has fallen ill and the file has been transferred to him recently. As prayed, list this case, under the same heading, on 24th June, 2024." 

It is a strange case because the very first order of the Court dated March 3, 2020 makes it eminently clear that the petitioner is entitled to relief but the State chose to ignore the specific order of the Court. It filed the counter affidavit after more than four years. The filing of rejoinder affidavit paves the way for the delayed relief to the petitioner after almost nine years of the registration of the case.