Suresh Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8455 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Suresh Prasad, Son of Late Kedar Mahto, Resident of Village- Erki, P.O.- Itwan, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Gaya .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar.

2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna

4. The State Project Director, Bihar Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, 8th Floor, Bihar School Examination Board (Senior Secondary) (Building, Budh Marh Patna)

5. The District Magistrate, Gaya

6. The District Education Officer, Mid-day Gaya, District- Gaya

7. The District Programme Officer, Gaya, District- Gaya

8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Erki, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Gaya.

9. The Managing Director, Bihar Rajya Saikshnik Adharbhut Saranchana Bikash Bhawan Nigam Ltd., Shiksha Bhawan, Bihar Rast Bhasha Parishad Campus Acharya Shiv Pujan Sahay Path Saidpur, Patna

10. Bihar Rajya Saikshnik Adharbhut Saranchana Bikash Bhawan Nigam Ltd. Shiksha Bhawan, Bihar Rast Bhasha Parishad Campus Acharya Shiv Pujan Sahay Path Saidpur, Patna through its Managing Director .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shiw Kumar Prabhakar For the Respondent/s : Mr. A.A.G.-6- P.N.Shahi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 24-10-2016 Heard Mr. Dinu Kumar for the petitioner, Mr.

Girijesh Kumar for respondent Nos, 4, 9 and 10 and Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, A.C. to A.A.G.-6 for the State.

No legal wrong has been done to the petitioner. Which school shall be upgraded is a purely executive/administrative decision of the State. There is no violation of any rule/provision. The petitioner, being in representative capacity, is raising a grievance with respect to

Patna High Court CWJC No.8455 of 2014 (3) dt.24-10-2016 2/2 upgradation of a school. The Court would be reluctant to delve into such matters.

After making submissions at some length, Mr. Dinu Kumar, Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would ventilate his grievance before appropriate authority/forum. Without opining anything on the claim of the petitioner, the writ application is disposed of permitting the petitioner to ventilate his grievance as raised through this application before the appropriate authority/forum in accordance with law.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/- U