Savitri Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4930 of 2021 ====================================================== 1.

Savitri Devi wife of Sanjay Kumar Pandey resident of Village- Sadhanpura, P.O.- Rampur Bheriyahi, P.S.- Kathaiya, District- Muzaffarpur. 2.

Sanjay Kumar Pandey son of Prahalad Pandey resident of VillageSadhanpura, P.O.- Rampur Bheriyahi, P.S.- Kathaiya, District- Muzaffarpur. .. ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, Mass Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

5.

The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur.

6.

The District Programme Officer (Literacy), Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Lal Mani Sharma For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Madanjeet Kumar, GP 20 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 02-02-2022 The matter is heard via video conferencing due to circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.

2. State counsel accepts notice for the respondents.

3. In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the following relief/reliefs:

"That the petitioners pray for issuance of a writ preferably in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents concerned to consider the claim/case of the petitioners properly for their absorptions on any suitable class-IV posts and issue appointment letter to the petitioners being Non Formal Education Instructor who have worked for more than 3 years in the District of Muzaffarpur in view of the direction of this Hon'ble Court as well as Hon'ble

Patna High Court CWJC No.4930 of 2021 dt.02-02-2022 2/2 Apex Court as several similarly situated persons have been absorbed in regular services but case of the petitioners is being discriminated. And/or any other writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions for granting any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled to, in the facts and circumstances."

4. In the present petition, petitioners have sought for the issuance of writ of Mandamus. They have not made out a case for the reasons that they have not established legal/statutory right followed by demand before the competent authority.

5. In the light of Apex Court decision in the case of Mani Subrat Jain V. State of Haryana reported in (1977) 1 SCC 486, the present petition is not maintainable, however, in the interest of litigants, petitioners are at liberty to approach the concerned respondent in submitting a detailed representation along with judicial pronouncements, if any within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The concerned respondent is hereby directed to decide it within a period of four months from the date of such representation.

6. With the above observations, writ petitions stands disposed off.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) GAURAV S./- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date