Chandrashekhar Roy v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6052 of 2024 ====================================================== Chandrashekhar Roy Son of Jagdev Roy, resident of Village-Prabhat Nagar, Bhaikh, P.s.-Bhaikh, District-Jehanabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

2.

The District Education Officer, District-Nawada. 3.

The Block Education Extension Officer, Block-Maskor, District-Nawada. 4.

Mukhiya cum Chairman Panchayat Employment Unit, Tetaria, Nawada. 5.

Panchayat Secretary cum Member Secretary Panchayat Employment Unit, Tetaria, Nawada.

6.

The District Programme Officer, Nawada.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Ritika Rani, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Government Pleader 5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ application has been filed for quashing the order dated 04.01.2024 passed by the Presiding Officer in Complaint Case No. 7 of 2018 (Annexure-P/9), office order vide Memo No. 06 dated 12.06.2023 issued by the Secretary, Panchayat Teacher Planning Unit, Gram Panchayat Tetaria, Meskaur (Annexure-P/8) and order dated 07.11.2017 passed by Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Tetaria, Mesjaur (Annexure-P/5) whereby petitioner has been terminated from the service of basic grade teacher class I to V.

Patna High Court CWJC No. 6052 of 2024(2) dt.11-11-2024 2/2

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 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) Koushik/- U