Rajesh Kumar Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18841 of 2013 ====================================================== 1.

Rajesh Kumar Singh and Anr Son Of Late Nand Kishore Singh Resident Of Mohalla- South Shri Krishnapuri, Ward No. 20, Begusarai, P.S.- Begusarai, District- Begusarai 2.

Bipin Kumar Singh Son Of Sri Mohan Singh Resident Of Village- Ratanpur, Ward No. 20, P.O. and P.S. Begusarai, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar, Department Of Education, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2.

The State Project Director, Bihar Education Council, Patna 3.

The Joint Secretary, Department Of Education, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4.

The District Programme Officer, Primary Education And Ssa, Begusarai 5.

The Executive Engineer, Primary Education, Ssa Begusarai 6.

The Assistant Engineer, Primary Education, Ssa, Begusarai ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Choudhary, |Advocate For the Respondent/s :

GA-2.

For BEPC :

Girijesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.2, State Project Director, Bihar Education Council, Patna.

2. With consent of the parties, the present writ application is being disposed of at this stage.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would be satisfied if this writ application is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the respondent No.2 within one month from today and if after filing of the said representation, a direction could be issued to the respondent No.2 to decide the said representation on merit after

Patna High Court CWJC No.18841 of 2013(7) dt.20-08-2025 2/2 giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

4. To the aforesaid prayer being made by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 does not have any objection.

5. Considering the limited nature of prayer being made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ application is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the respondent No.2 within one month from the date of this order and if such a representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent No.2 shall decide the same on merit after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of filing of the representation.

6. Needless to emphasis that the final order which shall be passed by respondent No.2 should be reasoned and speaking order.

7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ application is disposed of.

8. The pending I.A., if any, will be deemed to have been disposed of.

sanjeev/- (Alok Kumar Sinha, J) U