Pramod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.195 of 2015 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17463 of 2013 =========================================================== Pramod Kumar S/o Devendra Kumar, Resident of Village Naini, P.S. Chapra Muffasil, District Saran.
.... .... Petitioner /Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, Saran.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Saran.
3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Chapra, Saran.
4. The District Education Officer, Saran.
5. Dr. Puniyadeo Singh, Secretary, Balika Uchch Vidyalaya, Naini, Saran. .... .... Respondents / Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajendra Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, AC to G A 11 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA) Date: 12-07-2016 The order dated 13th September, 2013 passed by the learned Single Bench in CWJC No. 17463 of 2013 is the subject matter of the challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal. The learned Single Bench found that the challenge in the writ petition is to the order of termination dated 27th May, 2013 by a private institution. Therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.
We have learned counsel for the appellant and found that no cause is made out for invoking the jurisdiction of this Court on the basis of representation dated 27th May, 2013 submitted to the District
Patna High Court LPA No.195 of 2015 dt.12-07-2016 2/2 Magistrate, Saran at Chapra.
The grievance of the appellant is against Dr. Puniyadeo Singh, Secretary of the erstwhile Managing Committee of the school and his nephew Arun Kumar Singh. It is alleged that both of them are harassing him and, therefore, necessary action should be taken so that the school runs properly without fear and favour. We find that the grievance of the petitioner is against two individuals and not even against the Managing Committee. Such action against individuals does not warrant any interference in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. Whether there is any threat or there is any misbehaviour by any individual are the disputed questions of fact and can appropriately be raised before other alternative forum rather than in a writ application.
We do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Bench in CWJC No. 17463 of 2013. The present appeal is accordingly dismissed.
(Hemant Gupta, J) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) mrl U