Ashok Kumar Mandal v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18611 of 2016 ====================================================== Ashok Kumar Mandal Son of Ganeshi Mandal resident of Village - Kuayadh, P.S. Jainagar, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The District Magistrate, Madhubani.
4.
The District Education Officer, Madhubani.
5.
The District Programme Officer, Madhubani.
6.
The Block Development Officer, Khajauli, Madhubani. 7.
The Block Education Officer, Khajauli, District - Madhubani. 8.
Ram Parikshan Yadav Son of Saukhi Lal Yadav resident of Village - Akdara, P.S. - Khajouli, District - Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Jitendra Kr. Roy No. 1- Sc13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2024
1. The petitioner is not an aggrieved person.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is a resident of the locality where the respondent no. 8 was appointed in Middle School, Kangli Tole, Block Khajauli, District Madhubani, on the basis of forged and fabricated B.Ed certificate. Learned counsel further submits that the validity of the certificate of B.Ed was questioned by the respondent/State and the writ petition, L.P.A. and S.L.P., filed by respondent no. 8, have already been dismissed.
Patna High Court CWJC No.18611 of 2016(2) dt.13-05-2024 2/2
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to say as to whether respondent no. 8 is still working on the basis of that certificate. At the instance of petitioner, who is not an aggrieved person, this writ application is not maintainable. However, the District Education Officer, Madhubani shall look into the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law, if respondent no. 8, at all, is working on the basis of forged and fabricated certificate.
4. Accordingly, the present writ application stands dismissed with the aforesaid observation/direction.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U