Ratnesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2601 of 2019 ====================================================== Ratnesh Kumar Son of Ram Sanyog Prasad Resident of Village- Munni Kalyan, P.O.- Ram Nagar, P.S.- Gaighat, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

Deputy Development Commissioner, Sheohar.

3.

Chairman, Zila Parishad, Sheohar.

4.

District Education Officer, Sheohar.

5.

District Programme Officer (Establishment) Sheohar. 6.

Bishwasanjeet Mishra Son of Uday Prakash Mishra Resident of VillageWard No.14, Mishra Tola, Sheohar, P.S. and District- Sheohar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Madanjeet Kumar (GP 20) For Pvt. Resp. no. 6 :

Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 31-10-2023 1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

Learned counsel for the State as well as the private respondent submit that the present writ application has become infructuous, inasmuch as the petitioner has come before this Court against the order dated 22.11.2018, passed by the State Appellate Authority, Patna, by which the appeal filed by the petitioner bearing Appeal no. 648 of 2018 has been dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has challenged the interim order dated 20.07.2018, passed by District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Sheohar in Case no.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2601 of 2019(3) dt.31-10-2023 2/2 19 of 2017.

3.

Learned counsel further inform this Court that the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Sheohar has passed the final order on 20.04.2019, which went against the private respondent no. 6 and being aggrieved by the same, the private respondent has challenged it before the State Appellate Authority in Appeal case no. 234 of 2019, which has been allowed on 15.01.2020 and the matter has been remanded back to the District Appellate Authority by the State Appellate Authority.

4.

In view of the aforesaid submissions, in my opinion, no lis subsists for adjudication by this Court, accordingly, the writ application stands dismissed as having become infructuous.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) rinkee/- U