Raghvendra Narayan Rakesh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.827 of 2015 ====================================================== Raghvendra Narayan Rakesh, son of Balmiki Sharma, resident of villageOrbigha, P.S. - Karpi ( Sahar Telpa), District- Arwal. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

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

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

4. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Magadh Division, Gaya.

5. The District Education Officer, Arwal.

6. The District Programme Officer (Secondary Education), Arwal.

7. Sri Bipin Kumar, father's name not known to the petitioner, Incharge Headmaster, +2 Bhagwat High School Telpa, Arwal. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to AAG-7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-02-2017 Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to AAG-7.

The petitioner has approached this Court, invoking its writ jurisdiction under Article-226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to quash an order, whereby in an adhoc arrangement, Respondent no.7 was asked to function as Inharge Headmaster since the regular Headmaster was going to superannuate . In the impugned order, it was indicated that Respondent no.7 was seniormost in the said school. The said order was issued long back on

Patna High Court CWJC No.827 of 2015 (3) dt.02-02-2017 2/2 01.12.2014 vide Memo No.887 issued under the joint signature of the District Education Officer, Arwal and the District Programme Officer, Arwal. On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that it was purely an adhoc arrangement. The petitioner, though, had approached this Court invoking its writ jurisdiction, before approaching this Court, he had not specifically demanded justice before the competent authority and, as such, in absence of any demand of justice as well as keeping in view the fact that it was purely an adhoc arrangement, there is no reason to pass any favourable order.

The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U