Punam Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17239 of 2015 ====================================================== Punam Kumari, D/O Sri Vishwanath Mishra, H/O Sri Ravi Bhushan Pandey, Resident of Mohalla- Bagdulhan, Post Office- Hajipur, Police Station- Town thana Hajipur, District- Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.

The Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 4.

The District Education Officer, Vaishali.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. S.D.Yadav, AAG-9 Mr. Anil Kr. Verma, AC to AAG-9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-02-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following relief(s) :- "1.(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ commanding the respondents to issue letter of appointment to the successful candidates/ petitioner of Secondary/ Senior Secondary Teacher Eligibility Test (in short BSITET) on the post of secondary teacher for Class-IX to X as to when the petitioner has been obtained the percentage of marks 71.33 % in the examination of Secondary Senior Secondary Teacher Eligibility Test (BSITET)-2011 contained in

Patna High Court CWJC No.17239 of 2015(2) dt.08-02-2024 2/2 Annexure- 4 to this writ petition.

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner as untrained teacher under General Category of Mahila (iii) For any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled under law as well as on facts of this application."

3. At the outset, it is submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that the writ application neither mentions about any advertisement or application having been invited against which the petitioner applied and was not appointed. In view of the statements made in the writ application, the case is one which is fit to be dismissed with cost.

4. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application.

5. This application is dismissed as withdrawn. (Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U