← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/5530/2015dismissed

Veena Kumari And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-05-19Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5530 of 2015 ===========================================================

1. Veena Kumari, wife of Shree Mithilesh Kumar, resident of Village - Badhgouna, P.O.- Tejbigha, P.S.- Kako, District - Jehanabad.

2. Usha Sinha, wife of Braj Bihari Mandar, resident of Village - Adawan, P.O.- Thathopur, P.S.- Baheri, District - Darbhanga. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

2. The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Director, State Council of Educational Research and Training Bihar, Mahendru, Patna.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mani Kant Mishra, G.P.-25 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 19-05-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Question raised by the petitioner merited consideration provided the Question Nos. 28, 74, 82 and 94 were not considered by the expert committee and opined about the correctness of the question or the model answers provided by the respondents. Paragraph 17 of the counter affidavit clearly indicates that the expert committee only found question nos. 64, 65 and 95 to be wrong where full marks have been awarded but Question Nos. 28, 65, 74, 82 and 94 were not held to be wrong questions. Therefore, with

Patna High Court CWJC No.5530 of 2015 dt.19-05-2015 2/2 regard to the grievance raised in such case or model answers, the petition is not required to be considered or any order in favour of the petitioners on those questions is required to be passed. Writ application is dismissed.

The prayer of the petitioners beyond those questions will be governed by what has been adjudicated in C.W.J.C. No. 2591 of 2014 dated 28.02.2014, a copy of which is Annexure-A. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) Vats/- U