Himanshu Shekhar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5584 of 2013 =========================================================== Himanshu Shekhar Singh Son of Sri Tripurendra Kumar Singh at - Lakshminia, P.O. - Ruponi Jibachhpur, P.S. - Gamhariya, District - Madhepura. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
3. The Joint Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
4. B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur through its Registrar
5. The Vice-Chancellor, B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur
6. The Registrar, B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kr. Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhrub Mukherjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Anup Kumar Chou. and Mr. M.K. Upadhyay, AC to GP-10 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 22-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
A prospective candidate for the post of teacher, has filed this writ petition against the manner the rationalization of teacher has been done.
As per the claim of the petitioner, the rationalization should be done in terms of the guidelines issued by the U.G.C. but it has been done in the manner which will affect the education of the State of Bihar.
When the Court has asked the question about his locus
Patna High Court CWJC No.5584 of 2013 dt.22-01-2016 2/2 standi then he has submitted, he cannot improve the case than what has been stated in paragraph 4 of the writ petition. The petitioner is a prospective candidate for the post of teacher, not performing the duty anywhere as a Teacher, but he submits that if there will be a vacancy, he will get a chance of his selection, as he is holding requisite qualification which cannot be a basis to create locus in his favour. This Court is of the view that, this petition is misconceived. In such view of the matter, this Court does not find any merit in the present case and the same is accordingly, dismissed. This order has been passed in presence of the counsel for the University.
(Shivaji Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U