Alka Kumari @ Alka Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL REVIEW No.277 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10756 of 2010 ====================================================== Alka Kumari @ Alka Devi Wife of Niraj Kumar Singh Resident of VillageBhojpurwa, P.O.-Gopalganj, P.S.-Manjha, District-Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna.

3.

The Director, Primary Education Government of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna.

4.

The District Magistrate, Gopalganj 5.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Gopalganj 6.

The District Superintendent of Education Officer, Gopalganj. 7.

The Block Development Officer, Barauli, District-Gopalganj 8.

The Block Education Extension Officer, Barauli, District-Gopalganj 9.

The District Teacher Employment Appellate authority, Gopalganj. 10.

The Gram Panchayat Raj Salempur (West), through its Secretary i.e. Panchayat Secretary 11.

The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Salempur (West), Barauli, DistrictGopalganj 12.

The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Salempur (West), BlockBarauli 13.

Rakesh Kumar Son of Suresh Prasad At Present Panchayat Teacher, Newly created Primary School, Barai Tola, Block-Barauli, District-Goplaganj. 14.

Arbind Kumar Pandey Son of Dewendra Pandey, Resident of VillageSarafara, P.O.-Batardih, P.S.-Barauli, District-Gopalganj. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has filed present review application

Patna High Court C. REV. No.277 of 2018(3) dt.05-02-2020 2/2 on 02.07.2018 seeking review of an order dated 28.08.2014 passed in CWJC No. 10756 of 2010.

3. On careful perusal of the application seeking review, it is easily noticeable that no ground at all has been taken which could be the basis for review of the aforesaid order.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has referred to certain developments which had taken place after the order of this Court dated 28.08.2014 was passed. However, no case of an error apparent on the face of the record has been made out.

5. This review application, in my opinion has no merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) S.Ali/- U