Mahanand Bibhu And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.15669 of 2006 (10) dt.09-07-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15669 of 2006 ======================================================

1. Mahanand Bibhu , son of Late Bishwa Mohan Sukla Bibhu, resident of village- Pathaura, P.S. Narpatganj, District- Araria at present Secretary of the Committee of Sita Barish Lal Middle School, Sunari Nagar, Pithaura in the district of Araria

2. Hardeo Mandal, son of Tenai Mandal, resident of village- Pithoura, P.S. Narpatganj, District- Araria, at present Secretary of the Committee of Barish Lal Middle School, Harihar Prasad, Tola Pithoura in the district of Araria .... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Education Commissioner, Bihar, Patna

3. The Director-cum- Secretary, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna

4. The Special Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna

5. The Deputy Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna

6. Yoganand Jha, son of Late Shiva Nand Jha, General Secretary, Bihar Arajkiya Prathmic Shikshak Sanghars Samittee, resident of villageSahwazpur, P.O. Bhadreshwar, via- Bathnaha, P.S. Jogbani, DistrictAraria, at present residing at Purani Post Office Lane ( Gole), Punaichak, Patna-23 .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anant Kishore Lal Das Mr. Satish Kumar Mr. Nand Kishore Pd.Sinha Mr. Sita Ram Yadav Mr. Prem Shankar Mr. Bipin Kumar Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dubey For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to GA-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AC to GA-5.

The present writ petition has been listed under the heading "For Orders (On Petitions)" for hearing Interlocutory Application i.e. I.A. No.5172 of 2015, whereby a prayer has been

Patna High Court CWJC No.15669 of 2006 (10) dt.09-07-2015 made for amendment in the writ petition.

Candidly, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in another case, on identical issue, a writ petition was dismissed, against which an Appeal vide L.P.A. No.565 of 2013 had been preferred, which too stood dismissed. Keeping in view the fact that in identical issue, one another writ petition has already been dismissed, which has been affirmed by the Division Bench in L.P.A. No.565 of 2013, there is no reason to keep the matter pending.

The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U