Sweta Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2988 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 22947 of 2011 ====================================================== Sweta Kumari, W/O Bipendra Kumar, R/V- Uttimpur, P.O. and P.S. Hulasganj, District.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Jehanabad.

4. The District Superintendent of Education, Jehanabad.

5. The Block Development Officer, Hulasganj, Jehanabad.

6. The Block Education extension Officer, Hulasganj, District-Jehanabad.

7. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Dawthu, Block-Hulasganj, DistrictJehenabad.

8. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Dawthu, BlockHulasganj, District-Jehanabad.

9. Shashi Rani, D/O Naresh Prasad, R/V- Badai, P.S. Ishlampur, DistrictNalanda. Presently working as Panchayat Teacher in Primary School, Gram Panchayat Dawthu Block-Hulasganj, District-Jehanabad. .... .... Respondents/Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, A.A.G. 15. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

The present application has been filed for modification of order dated 31.07.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 22947 of 2011 by which the writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the State Appellate Authority against the order dated 03.12.2010 passed by the Member, District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Jehanabad, within a

Patna High Court MJC No.2988 of 2017 (2) dt.07-02-2018 2/2 period of thirty days from the date of order i.e. 31.07.2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to some unavoidable reasons, he could not prefer an appeal before the State Appellate Authority. Hence, he prays for further thirty days time to prefer an appeal before the State Appellate Authority. Considering the grounds mentioned in the application, the petitioner is granted further thirty days time to prefer an appeal before the State Appellate Authority from today. The order dated 31.07.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 22947 of 2011 stands modified to the extent as indicated above. The modification application is, accordingly, allowed. U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U