Kamleshwar Rai And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12637 of 2011 ======================================================

1. Kamleshwar Rai son of Late Rama Rai resident of Village and Post Office - Dumarhar, P.S. Darauli, Distt. Siwan

2. Ramayan Singh son of Late Ram Bahal Singh resident of Village and Post Office -Sohagara, P.S. Guthani, Distt. Siwan

3. Chhedi Tiwari son of Sri Rikh Nath Tiwari resident of Village and Post Office -Tenuan, P.S. Guthani, Distt. Siwan

4. Nigam Kumar Pandey son of Late Triveni Nath Pandey resident of Village - Harpur P.S. Guthani, Distt. Siwan

5. Shafi Muhammad Ansari son of Sri Nasir Ahmad resident of Village and Post Office - Sohagara, P.S. Guthani, Distt. Siwan. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department New Secretariat Patna

2. The Secretary Human Resources Development Department New Secretariat Patna

3. The Director , Human Resources Development Department New Secretariat Patna

4. The District Education Officer, Siwan

5. The District Superintendent of Education, Siwan

6. The District Accounts Officer, Department of Finance, Govt. of Bihar Siwan.

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : AC to GA - 3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 7.

01-04-2016 After some argument, Sri Arun Kumar Singh, learned counsel for petitioners, in presence of learned A.C. to Govt. Advocate - 3, makes a prayer for disposal of the present writ petition so that petitioners may file separate representation before the respondent no. 4/District Education Officer, Siwan regarding claim, as made in the present writ petition.

Patna High Court CWJC No.12637 of 2011 (7) dt.01-04-2016 2/2 The prayer is allowed.

The writ petition stands disposed of with liberty, as indicated above.

It goes without saying that if petitioners file separate representation before the respondent no. 4 within a period of eight weeks from today, the respondent no. 4 may examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing of the representation.

It is made clear that this Court has not recorded any opinion on the merit of the case.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U