Patna High CourtCWJC/19974/2014disposed

Rajdeo Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-09-13Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19974 of 2014 =========================================================== Rajdeo Singh, Son of Late Raghunath Singh, Resident of Village: Hariharpur, P.S. Silao, District: Nalanda.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Education Officer, Nalanda.

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

6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Parwalpur, Nalanda.

7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Ekangarsarai, Nalanda. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurjati Kr. Prasad, G.P.14 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State. The petitioner has challenged the validity of officer order contained in Memo No. 8423 dated 26.12.2013 (Annexure-6) whereby the claim of the petitioner for grant of Graduate Trained Scale was rejected by the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Nalanda on the ground that the B.A. qualification of the petitioner i.e. Sahitya Alankar from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar is not a valid certificate.

The legality and the validity of Sahitya Alankar degree is no more res integra. It has been decided in numerous case by the learned Single Judge and Division Bench of this Court and even

Patna High Court CWJC No.19974 of 2014 dt.13-09-2018 2/2 the matter traveled up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has not interfered with the decision of this Court passed by the learned Single Judge and Division Bench. Considering the aforesaid, the Court does not find any infirmity in the order as contained in Annexure-6. The writ application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Uday/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 17.09.2018 Transmission Date