Sanjeev Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5530 of 2024 ====================================================== Sanjeev Kumar Jha son of Bindeshwar Jha, resident of Ward No. 15, Village Riga Goat, P.O.- Riga, District Sitamadhi, Bihar- 843327. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the District Appellate Authority, Sitamarhi. 2.

The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Kothiya Rai Suppi, District - Sitamarhi.

3.

The Chief cum President, Village Panchayat Raj Kothiya Rai, Suppi, District- Sitamarhi.

4.

The Block Education Officer, Suppi, District- Sitamarhi. 5.

The District Education Officer, Sitamarhi.

6.

The District Program Officer (Establishment), Sitamarhi. 7.

Abhay Kumar Singh, son of Ram Narayan Singh, resident of VillageDharwada, P.O.- Dharwada, Block- Suppi, District- Sitamarhi, Bihar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mirityunjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Ambastha, Standing Counsel 26 Mr. Santosh Kumar Mishra, AC to SC 26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 13.10.2023 passed by the District Appellate Authority, Sitamarhi in Case No. 10 of 2023 by which appeal of this petitioner was rejected.

3 . At the outset, learned counsel for the State appears and raises preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of this writ application on the ground that petitioner has got alternative remedy before the State Appellate

Patna High Court CWJC No.5530 of 2024(2) dt.30-10-2024 2/2 Authority. He further submits that no reason has been assigned, as to why this writ application shall be heard by this Hon'ble High Court, even when alternative remedy to move before the State Appellate Authority is available to the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to dispute the contentions made on behalf of the State.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to petitioner to move before the State Appellate Authority by filing appeal and the State Appellate Authority is directed to proceed in the matter and dispose of the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U