Dr. Shambhu Nath Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8849 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.

Dr. Shambhu Nath Singh Son of Late Bhola Singh, resident of MohallaSrikrishnanagar, Police Station Sadar Motihari, District- East Champaran. 2.

Shardanandan Prasad Singh Sarang, Son of Late Sukhdeo Singh, resident of Village- Mohammedpur Muksudan, Police Station- Sahebganj, DistrictMuzaffarpur, 3.

Ashok Pandey, Son of Sri Binda Pandey, resident of Village P.O.- Lauriya, P.S.- Areraj, District- East Champaran.

4.

Arun Kumar, Son of Late Ravindra Nath Singh, resident of MohallaRajendranager, Police Station Chatauni, District- East Champaran. 5.

Subhash Chandra, son of Late Shyam Chandra Prasad, resident of MohallaAgarwa near Hospital Chowk, Police Station Sadar Motihari, District- East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

Sayad Nasim Ahmad, son of Late Md. Yunus, Chairman, Managing Committee, Maharaja Harendra Kishore Inter College, Maharaja Nagar, East Champaran, Motihari.

4.

Manoj Kumar Mishra, son of Late Shrutidhar Mishra, Principal-cumSecretary, Maharaja Harendra Kishore Inter College, Maharaja Nagar, East Champaran, Motihari.

5.

The Chairperson, State Appellate Authority, Education Department, Patna, Bihar.

6.

The Member, District Appellate Tribunal, East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Madanjeet Kumar-Gp20 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3-4 and learned counsel for the respondent-State.

Patna High Court CWJC No.8849 of 2017(10) dt.16-12-2025 2/2

2. In the present writ application, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 27.04.2017 passed in Appeal Case No. 05/17 by the State Appellate Authority whereby and whereunder the appeal filed by the respondent nos. 3 and 4 has been allowed and the order dated 14.12.2016 passed by the District Appellate Tribunal, East Champaran in Case No. 966/2015 cancelling the termination order of the petitioners has been set aside. The petitioners have further prayed for being reinstated in service of the college.

3. It is informed by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as by the other side that the petitioners have already attained the age of superannuation and, therefore, the relief of reinstatement being claimed by the petitioners cannot be granted.

4. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the present writ application has become infructuous because the relief prayed for, cannot be granted to the petitioners. Accordingly, the present writ application is dismissed.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) kiran/- U