Pratima Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.660 of 2020 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23443 of 2011 ====================================================== Pratima Devi, female, aged about 50 years, W/o Arjun Prasad Sah, resident of village- Parwana, P.S.- Forbisganj, District- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

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

3.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 5.

The Director, Mass Education, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

The District Magistrate, Araria.

The District Magistrate, Purnea.

District Education Officer-cum-Incharge Jan Siksha Eduction, Araria & Purnea (Now the post of DEO has been changed as District Programme Officer).

6.

7.

8.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey (Aag 15) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-02-2021 Heard both sides.

The petitioner filed this modification petition to correct the name of the petitioner whose name appears at serial no.93 in the writ petition being CWJC No.23443 of 2011. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed the certificate of Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board issued on 27.05.2016 in which the name of the petitioner is Pratima Devi, but it appears that prior to issuance of the

Patna High Court MJC No.660 of 2020(3) dt.24-02-2021 2/2 certificate by Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, the petitioner along with others filed the writ petition in the year 2011. The petitioner disclosed her name as Pratibha Devi, wife of Arjun Sah. The Vakalatnama was also executed in the name of Pratibha Devi, wife of Arjun Sah, but on the face of it, it appears that on the basis of a certificate issued after the order passed in CWJC No.23443 of 2011, the petitioner filed the petition for correcting her name. There is no document to show that when the petitioner filed the writ petition, her name was Pratima Devi not Pratibha Devi, therefore, I do not find it appropriate to change the name of the petitioner on the basis of the certificate issued much after the order passed by this Court in the writ petition.

Accordingly, the modification petition is dismissed. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T