IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1566 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13140 of 2007 ====================================================== Mainejar Mishra 'Sant' Son of Late Deodhari Mishra Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, Police Station - Turkaulia, District - East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 4. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 5. The Engineer-In-Chief, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 6. The Executive Engineer (Mechanical) Don Canal Division, Ram Nagar, West Champaran 7. The Executive Engineer, Minor Distribution Division No. 7, Goludih , Post - Office- Mahulia, Police Station - Ghatshila, East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. .... .... Respondents/Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Arvind Kumar Tewary, Advocate For the Respondent State of Bihar : Mr. Manoj Kr. Ambasta, G.P.-14 For the Respondent State of Jharkhand: Mr. Dhruba Mukherjee, Advocate Mr. Sanjiv Jaiswal, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER Patna High Court LPA No.1566 of 2011 (2) dt.08-11-2011 2 / 2 2 (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2. 08-11-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 19th July 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 13140 of 2007, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. In a writ petition filed in 2007, the appellant sought to challenge the order of recovery made on 1st April 1999, the learned single Judge has rejected the petition as grossly belated. Therefore, the present Appeal. It appears that while serving as Junior Engineer, in spite of his transfer, the appellant did not hand over charge nor did he surrender the official quarter in his occupation before proceeding to resume charge at the place of transfer. Consequently, a sum of Rs.1,09,405/- was ordered to be recovered from him, which the appellant has paid in installments. We agree with the learned single Judge. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)