Chunni Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.953 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15859 of 2009 ====================================================== Chunni Kumari W/o Sri Sanjay Kumar, resident of Village- Deoriya (Choudhari Tola), P.S. Paru, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. District Teachers appointment appellate Tribunal, Muzaffarpur, through its Chairman.
3. District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.
4. District Superintendent of Education (Now District Programme Officer), Muzaffarpur.
5. Special Officer, Bihar Education Project, Muzaffarpur.
6. Block Education Extension Officer, Paru, Muzaffarpur.
7. Mukhia, Deoria East Gram Panchayat, Paru, Muzaffarpur.
8. Panchayat Secretary, Deoria East Gram Panchayat, Paru, Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr Banwari Sharma Mr. Shiv Kumar For the Respondent/s :
Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) 22-02-2018 Perused I. A. No.8241 of 2017. Even though the order was passed on 16.07.2014 by the learned Single Judge, which is under challenge, the writ application seems to have been finally filed on 26.04.2016, which is an extraordinary delay and the reason given as justification does not satisfy us to condone the delay so caused. Even otherwise, we have gone through the order impugned dated 16.07.2014 passed by the learned Single
Patna High Court LPA No.953 of 2016(8) dt.22-02-2018 2/2 Judge. Since the decision of the learned Single Judge is based on a Full Bench decision of this High Court in the case of Kalpana Rani vs. the State of Bihar, reported in 2014 (2) PLJR 665, there is no occasion to go into the issue of appointment or non- appointment on the post of a Shiksha Mitra, a post no longer in existence. Even on the merits, there is nothing much to interfere in appeal.
In view of the above, the limitation petition as well as the appeal is dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Nilu Agrawal, J) sk U