Anapurna Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19716 of 2018 ====================================================== Anapurna Kumari D/o Pursuhottam Pandey, Resident of Village- and P.O. and P.S.-Belaw, Distt.-Sheikhpura at present residing at Village-Augari,P.S.- Augari,Distt.-Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The District Magistragte, Nalanda 3.

The District Programme Officer EstablishmentNalanda 4.

The Bihar Shanskrit Education Board,Patna through its Secretary 5.

The Secretary,Ramvriksh Sanskrit Primary cum Secondary School,Nalanda 6.

The Head Master,Ramvriksh Sanskrit Primary cum Secondary School,Nalanda ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

For the State :

Mr. Subash Chandra Mishra -SC16 Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Adv. AC to SC 16 For the BSSB :

Mr. S.S. Sundaram, Adv.

Mr. Shashank Shekhar Jha, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 17-10-2022

1. No one appears for the petitioner. Following prayer has been made:

The petitioner claims himself to be residing in Bihar and states that she had applied in response to an advertisement published in the newspaper dated 09.01.2016 and while the process of selection was going on she apprehended that the undeserving candidate might be selected. She therefore submitted a representation to the Sanskrit Education Board and the Board made certain queries on the basis of the representation

Patna High Court CWJC No.19716 of 2018(2) dt.17-10-2022 2/2 made by the petitioner and inquiry/probe is alleged to have been made. She prays that no effective steps have been taken thereafter.

2. The averments made in the petition as noted above are merely bald allegations with no documentary proof. The petitioner does not state that she appeared for interview and what exactly is her personal grievance. As she has not been selected, the same would not be sufficient ground for her to make allegations as made in the petition.

3. The writ petition is found to be wholly frivolous, without merits and is accordingly dismissed.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Shaswat/- Item no. 48 U