Vivek Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1281 of 2014 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6207 of 2013 =========================================================== Vivek Kumar Son of Sri Shankar Singh Resident of Naya Tola, Pipra Devas, Block - Barauni, District- Begusarai.

.... .... Appellant

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development, Department, Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Begusarai.

4. The District Educational Officer, Begusarai.

5. The District Programme Officer, (Establishment), Begusarai.

6. The Block Development Officer, Block - Teghra, District - Begusarai.

7. The Block Education Officer, Teghra, District - Begusarai.

8. The District Teacher Employment Appelalate, Tribunal, Begusarai, through its member.

9. The Panchayat Secretary Gram Panchayat Raj, Takiya, Block - Bhagwanpur, District- Begusarai.

10. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Tekiya, Block - Bhagwanpur, District- Begusarai.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC-9 Mr. Yogesh Kumar, AC to SC-9 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI And HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 21-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

This appeal is dismissed because the Court does

Patna High Court LPA No.1281 of 2014 dt.21-04-2017 not find any infirmity with the decision in order dated 08.08.2014, passed by learned Single Judge, while refusing to interfere with the order of District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal, Begusarai refusing to entertain an application against an appointment already made in the year 2010, which was said to be challenged in the year 2013. The settled position cannot be unsettled at the convenience of a litigant, is a well settled principle of law. Even this Court does not find anything miss with the dismissal of the case of the appellant either by the Tribunal or by the learned Single Judge.

Thus, we find no merit in this appeal, hence, it is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajeev/- U