Keshava Prasad Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17305 of 2015 ===========================================================
1. Keshava Prasad Singh, Son of Late Ram Sundar Singh, Resident of C-10, Professors Colony, North Shastri Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Shastri Nagar, DistrictPatna.
2. Rajendra Prasad Singh, Son of Late Viswanath Singh, Resident of VillageChhawarahi, P.S.- Piro, District- Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Bihar School Examination Board through its Secretary, Sinha Library Road, Patna.
3. Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna.
4. Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna.
5. Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
6. The District Education Officer, Bhojpur, Ara.
7. Mr. Anil Kumar, Development Programme Officer, District Education Officer, Bhojpur, Ara.
8. Munilal Singh, Ex-Incharge Headmaster, Dr. Lohia Memorial Valika Uchh Vidyalaya, Chhawarahi, Bhojpur.
.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Sachindra Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the State :
Mr. M.K. Ambastha, G.P.14 For the Board :
Mr. Lalit Kishore, Senior Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 30-09-2016 Heard counsel for the petitioners, counsel for the private respondent, counsel for the State and the counsel appearing on behalf of the Examination Board.
The fight is within the privately managed school for supremacy. There are two Headmasters and two parallel committees which are said to be inexistence and both the petitioners and private respondent no.8 claim a right over the school in question by virtue of certain decisions taken by the two rival committees. In a situation like
Patna High Court CWJC No.17305 of 2015 dt.30-09-2016 2 / 2 that, obviously the Board had no option but to constitute a committee of ad hoc kind to run the day to day affairs of the school. The private respondent may not be the epitome of virtue but that by itself will not enthuse the High Court to get into a private dispute under a summary jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The parties are free to launch their legal battle before a civil court of competent jurisdiction, get a declaration as to which committee is the correct committee and who has a right to be the Headmaster of the school in question. Till then they are free to continue their fight. Writ is dismissed with liberty as above.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) S.Kumar/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 03.10.2016 Transmission Date