Shailesh Kumar Mishra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7040 of 2016 ====================================================== Shailesh Kumar Mishra son of Sri Shaligram Mishra, resident of village Mohabbat Parsa, P.O. and P.S. Revelganj, Dist. Chapra. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

2. Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The Divisional Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra

4. The District Magistrate, Chapra

5. The District Education Officer, Chapra

6. The District Programme Officer ( Establishment), Chapra

7. The Block Education Officer, Revelganj, Chapra

8. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Chapra

9. The Sampurnanad Sanskrit University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh through its Registrar

10. The Vice Chancellor of Sampurnanand University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh

11. The Public Information Office, Sampurnanand University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh

12. Smt. Radhika Kumari, wife of Sri Akhilanad Pandey, resident of village Mohabbat Parsa, P.O. +P.S. Revelganj, Dist-Chapra. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gyan Prakash For the Respondent/s : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 28-04-2016 Heard Mr. Gyan Prakash for the petitioner . No one has appeared on behalf of the State respondents. It appears the petitioner is raising a grievance with respect to the engagement/appointment of the respondent no.12 as Headmistress of the Middle School. The educational certificate of the respondent has been questioned.

Mr. Prakash draws attention of the Court to

Patna High Court CWJC No.7040 of 2016 (2) dt.28-04-2016 2/2 Annexure-3 which is a notice issued to the petitioner by the Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Chapra calling upon him to furnish the papers/affidavits etc. On the strength of aforesaid, it is submitted that the matter is being enquired into by the respondents. He also submits that another representation has been made before the same authority by the petitioner.

Be that as it may since from the pleadings available on record, it appears the enquiry is being made into the appointment of the respondent no.12. It is expected the same shall reach to its logical conclusion within a reasonable period of time.

The writ application stands disposed of.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Shyam/- U