Anil Kumar Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5701 of 2024 ====================================================== Anil Kumar Mandal Son of Ganga Prasad Mandal, Resident of Village- Ward No. 9, Kodarkatta, P.S.- Basopatti, and District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Director Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The District Magistrate, Madhubani.

4.

The District Education Officer, Madhubani.

5.

The District Program Officer (Estab), Madhubani. 6.

The District Appellate Authority Madhubani, through its Chairman. 7.

The Block Development Officer, Madhwapur, Madhubani. 8.

The Block Education Officer, Madhwapur, Madhubani. 9.

The Panchayat Teacher Niyojan Committee Gram Panchayat Raj Sahar South Panchayat, through its Secretary.

10.

Sri Amarnath Sahu, Son of Ram Kewat Sahu, Resident of Village- Janki Nagar, P.S.- Basopatti, District- Madhubani.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Standing Counsel (1) ====================================================== 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 10.02.2024 passed by the District Appellate Authority, Madhubani in Appeal Case No. 03/19-2022 by which appeal of this petitioner was dismissed.

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

Patna High Court CWJC No.5701 of 2024(2) dt.30-10-2024 2/2 petitioner has got alternative remedy before the State Appellate 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