Kumari Usha Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1357 of 2017 ====================================================== Kumari Usha Sinha, wife of Late Brahmdeo Mahto, resident of VillageAbgil Rampur, Tola Hussaina, P.O.- Paharpur, P.S.- Suryagarha, DistrictLakhisarai. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director (Primary Education), Bihar, Patna.

3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Munger Division, Munger.

4. The District Education Officer, Lakhisarai.

5. Sri Arvind Kumar, son of name not known, the Asstt. Teacher, Sri Zakir Hussain Government Basic School, Suryagarha, Lakhisarai. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Tewari, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey-Aag15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 01-12-2017 Heard Mr. Dilip Kumar Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

2. Mr. Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the statements made in para 10 and 11 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.2 to indicate that during the pendency of the writ application, the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed.

3. The statements made in para 10 and 11 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.2, are quoted herein below for ready reference:

10. That it is relevant to mention here that for the purposes of promotion from LSS

Patna High Court CWJC No.1357 of 2017 (3) dt.01-12-2017 2/3 cadre to SES cadre, the date of appointment in matric trained scale in LSS cadre is deciding factor and from perusal of gradation list of LSS furnished by the RDDE it appeared that the petitioner was appointed in matric trained scale on 01.04.1991 whereas, the respondent no.5 was appointed in matric trained scale on 13.03.1992 and therefore vide order contained in memo no.

dated 22.08.2017 it has been held that the petitioner is senior to that of respondent no.5 and accordingly the office order issued by the RDDE Munger Division, Munger contained in memo no.

dated 31.01.2017 whereby the petitioner has been suspended and placed under departmental proceeding, has been cancelled and necessary direction has been issued to act in view of the said order and communicate accordingly.

11. That from the aforesaid facts stated hereinabove, it would be evident that in view of the order and direction of this Hon'ble Court, the answering respondent has considered the matter / representation of the petitioner after hearing all concerned wherein the petitioner has held to be senior to the respondent no.5 and necessary

Patna High Court CWJC No.1357 of 2017 (3) dt.01-12-2017 3/3 direction has been issued to the RDDE Munger Division, Munger to take necessary steps in the matter.

4. In view of statements made in para 10 and 11 of the counter affidavit, the writ application is disposed of as having become infructuous.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Uday/- U