Patna High CourtC. REV./284/2016dismissed

The State Of Bihar And ORS v. Shankaranand Jha

2017-08-02Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.284 of 2016 ======================================================

1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Secondary, Primary and Adult Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna

3. The Joint Secretary, Department of Secondary, Primary and Adult Education, Government of Bihar, Patna

4. The Special Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna

5. The Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Boring Canal Road, Patna, through its Secretary.

6. The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Boring Canal Road, Patna

7. The Managing Director, Bani Bilas Sanskrit High School, Sukhsena, Purnea, through its Secretary-cum-Circle Officer, Katihar

8. The President, Bani Bilas Sanskrit High School, Sukhsena, Bhatotar Chakla, P.S.- Barhara Kothi, District- Purnea

9. The Headmaster, Bani Bilas High School, Suklhsen, Purnea

10. The District Education Officer, Purnea .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

Shankaranand Jha son of Shri Shobha Nand Jha, Resident of villageSukhsena, P.S.- Bhatotar Chakia, District- Purnea .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arjun Prasad For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL ORDER 02-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the State and counsel for the respondent.

The review application is dismissed, because there is no error apparent on the face of record. If the State authorities have chosen not to assist and file affidavits or rebut the position, taken by the opposite parties, whose writ remained pending for 11 years, then the only thing this Court can allow is to fix

Patna High Court C. REV. No.284 of 2016 (4) dt.02-08-2017 2/2 responsibility upon the authorities, who was responsible for the predicament of the State. But, otherwise, the Court is not satisfied with failure of the State at all stages, which should be the reason of now reviewing or recalling the earlier order, which has already been implemented.

Review application is dismissed. The liberty given with regard to fixing responsibility is open to the State authorities. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) SKM/- U