In Mukesh Kumar S/o Late Guneshwar Prasad Singh & Anr. vs. The Union of India, through the Secretary, the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas & Ors. (2025), Patna High Court's Division Bench of Chief Justice Vipul M. Pancholi and Justice Partha Sarthy delivered a 11-page long judgment dated July 24, 2025, wherein, Justice Pancholi concluded:"We are of the view that the Single Judge while passing the impugned order. We are of the view that the learned Single Judge has not committed any error while dismissing the petition filed by the present appellants / petitioners. Hence, no interference is required in the present appeal. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed." This is the 3rd judgement authored by Justice Pancholi as Chief Justice.
The Court was referring to the 13-page long judgment dated November 28, 2022 by Justice Madhuresh Prasad. Justice Prasad had observed:"The petitioner cannot be permitted to blow hot and cold at the same time."
He also observed: "The petitioner clearly does not fulfill thev“prescribed qualification” as per Clause R-3 (b). Therefore, also he is not in a position to claim appointment under the SABF. SABF stands for Superannuation Benefit Fund Scheme.
The Court recorded that the petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner was pursuing his ITI course. The Authorities, therefore, should have provided the petitioner an opportunity of completing the ITI course and thereby acquiring the requisite qualification, by extending the normal waiting period of three years, up to seven years, under Clause R-3 (d) of he SABF Scheme for becoming eligible under option R-3 of the SABF.
No comments:
Post a Comment