IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11838 of 2010 RAJESH KUMAR, SON OF BIRENDRA KUMAR, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA LINEPAR, MIRZAPUR, WARD NO.22, NAWADA, P.O., P.S. AND DISTRICT NAWADA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NAWADA. 4. THE CHAIRMAN, EMPOWERED STANDING COMMITTEE, NAWADA NAGAR PARISHAD, NAWADA. 5. THE EXECUITVE OFFICER, NAWADA NAGAR PARISHAD, NAWADA. 6. RAJENDRA PRASAD YADAV, SON OF NOT KNOWN WORKING PRESENTLY AS HEAD CLERK CUM ACCOUNTANT ON CONTRACT BASIS, NAGAR PARISHAD, NAWADA. ----------- 03. 28.07.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner Ward Councillor of Nawada Nagar Parishad is aggrieved by the resolution of the Nagar Parishad dated 28.4.2010, Annexure-3, whereunder it has been decided to continue Sri Rajendra Prasad Yadav, the retired Head Assistant cum Accountant of the Nagar Parishad, respondent no.6 on the same post on contract basis from 1.5.2010 to 30.4.2011 on the ground that he is over 60 years old and cannot be continued even on contract basis as there is clear Bar under Sub-Section-(9) of Section 36 of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 to continue anyone above the age of 60 years on any post in the Nagar Parishad. 3. Having heard counsel for the petitioner and the State, I dispose of this writ application directing the petitioner to file representation before the Executive Officer of the Nagar Parishad, Nawada highlighting the aforesaid illegality in appointing respondent - 2 - no.6 on contract basis to serve as Head Assistant cum- Accountant in the Nagar Parishad and the Executive Officer shall pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt of the representation of the petitioner along with a copy of this order before the Executive Officer. It goes without saying that petitioner is always at liberty to raise any other point in the representation. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)