Patna High CourtCWJC/23412/2013disposed

Md. Jamil Akhtar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-01-23Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23412 of 2013 ====================================================== Md. Jamil Akhtar S/O Hazi Mohammad Mohiuddin Resident of Village - Simrahi Bazar, P.S. Raghopur, District - Supaul .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna

3. The Director, Primary Education, Government Of Bihar, Patna

4. The District Magistrate, Supaul, District - Supaul

5. The District Education Officer, Supaul, District - Supaul

6. The Block Development Officer, Raghopur Block, District - Supaul

7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Raghopur Block, District - Supaul

8. The Gram Panchayat Raj, Haripur, Within Raghopur Block, District - Supaul Through Its Mukhiya

9. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Haripur, Within Raghopur Block, District - Supaul

10. Panchayat Secretary-Cum-Member Secretary, Panchayat Teacher Appointment Unit, Haripur Within Raghopur Block, District - Supaul

11. Md. Abdul Kalam Azad S/O Md. Fida Hussain Resident Of Village - Hanuman Nagar, P.O. - Haripur, Block And P.S. - Raghopur, District - Supaul .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumar Alok, SC 8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL ORDER 23-01-2015 Let the petitioner assail Annexure- 8 before the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority especially when yet another appeal is pending before the said forum challenging the appointment of the petitioner by private respondent no.11 in the present writ application. The District Teachers Employment Authority is directed to decide the matter within a period of three months

Patna High Court CWJC No.23412 of 2013 (2) dt.23-01-2015 2/2 because a 2011 application can remain pending indefinitely and similarly if the petitioner files an application, it will be also taken up on priority and after hearing respondent no.11 and the petitioner, an appropriate order would be passed in both the applications. This is being done so that no conflicting or overlapping orders are passed by the said forum. Writ stands disposed of with the above liberty to the petitioner.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) sk U