Vinod Sharma v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2218 of 2022 ====================================================== Vinod Sharma Son of Late Ramdeo Sharma Resident of Village- Bhui, P.S.- Silao, District- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
2.
The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
3.
The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.
The District Magistrate, Nalanda.
5.
The District Education Officer, Nalanda.
6.
The District Programme Officer, Establishment, Nalanda. 7.
The Block Development Officer, Block- Rajgir, Nalanda. 8.
The Block Education Officer, Rajgir, Nalanda. 9.
The Block Education Officer, Ben, Nalanda.
10.
The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Bhui, Rajgir, Nalanda. 11.
The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Bhui, Rajgir, Nalanda. 12.
Munilal Son of Bhagwan Mistri Resident of Village- Bhui, P.S.- Silao, District- Nalanda.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Subhash Chandra Mishra (Sc16) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 01-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to approach before the respondent no. 5, the District Education Officer, Nalanda for redressal of his grievances. Liberty, so sought, is granted.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2218 of 2022(3) dt.01-04-2024 2/2
3. It is needless to state that in case appropriate representation is filed, within a period of four weeks from today, the respondent no. 5 shall dispose of the same after affording opportunity of personal hearing or through his counsel by passing a reasoned and a speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks, thereafter.
4. Respondent no. 5 shall be solely liable for noncompliance of this order within the stipulated period.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the claim of the petitioner.
6. The writ petition stands disposed of on the aforesaid terms.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T