Krishna Kant Tiwari v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Namely Depak Kumar, Education Department, Govt.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4982 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1459 of 2016 ====================================================== Krishna Kant Tiwari Son of Late Devi Din Tiwari Resident of Village-P.O.- Gosiya, P.S.-Manjihagarh District-Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Namely Depak Kumar, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar Patna 2.

The Chairman namely Arshad Firoz Son of Not Known, Bihar Sanskrit Siksha Board Patna 3.

The Secretary Sri Anil Kumar Sinha, Bihar Sanskrit Siksha Board Patna 4.

The District Magistrate namely Dr. Nitesh Ram Chandra Devere , Son of not Known, West Champaran Bettiah 5.

The District Education Officer Namely Sri Harendra Jha West Champaran Bettiah 6.

The District Programme Officer (Establishment) namely Sri Sanjeev Kumar West Champaran Bettiah.

7.

The Block Education Officer namely Punam Kumari Bettiah Block West Champaran 8.

The Managing Committee of Sri Laxmi Kumar Sanskrit Primary Middle School, Namely Sri Ganesh Prasad Son of not Known, Lal Bazar DistrictBettiah West Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar No For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A. R. Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 31-07-2019 In compliance of the order of this Court, the Sanskrit Shiksha Board has filed a show cause, wherein it has been stated that the petitioner has worked in the school till 23.11.2015 and he was paid salary up to 31.10.2015 and an additional salary for 23 days has already been sanctioned.

Patna High Court MJC No.4982 of 2018(4) dt.31-07-2019 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is wrong on the part of the Sanskrit Shiksha Board to contend that the petitioner has worked up to 23.11.2015, inasmuch as the Headmaster of the said school has prepared salary bill for 28 months.

At this juncture, the learned counsel for the Sanskrit Shiksha Board submits that the Managing Committee of the School had terminated the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 21.10.2016 and the same has also been approved by the Board on 27.05.2019.

Having considered the rival contentions of the parties, this Court is of the view that the aforesaid disputed question of facts/ aforesaid controversy cannot be resolved in a contempt proceeding, hence liberty is granted to the petitioner to seek redressal of his grievances by way of a fresh writ petition, if so advised.

Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands disposed off with the aforesaid liberty.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U