Patna High CourtL.P.A/1335/2014dismissed

Sahja Nand Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-04-26Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1335 of 2014 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8462 of 2013 =========================================================== Sahja Nand Sharma, Son of Late Badri Singh, Resident of Village- Shahar Rampur, P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna .... .... Appellant

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Patna

2. The District Magistrate, Patna

3. The District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Patna

4. District Education Officer, Patna

5. District Superintendent of Education, Patna

6. Block Education Officer, Naubatpur Block, District- Patna

7. Panchayat Secretary Gram Panchayat Raj Deora, Naubatpur, Patna

8. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Deora, Naubatpur, Patna .... .... Respondents =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 26-04-2017 On 12.08.2014, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application refusing to interfere with the order of the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority dated 30.06.2012. There are two primary reasons for dismissal of the appeal filed by the appellant before the Appellate Authority :

(i) That non-appointment of the appellant, for which process was completed in the year 2009-10, was sought to be reopened in the year 2012 and (ii) That the 2006 Rule, on the basis of which the

Patna High Court LPA No.1335 of 2014 dt.26-04-2017 2/2 previous appointment had been carried out and made, itself has been repealed and a new Rule was already in place. Therefore, the Appellate Authority was of the opinion that no direction for consideration of appointment of the appellant could be passed.

In our opinion, the reasons provided by the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority are absolutely correct, and, therefore, the learned Single Judge by refusing to interfere with the said order, has committed no illegality.

Appeal has no merit. It is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) Rajesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 28.04.2017 Transmission Date NA