Anil Kumar Thakur v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5046 of 2016 =========================================================== Anil Kumar Thakur, son of Late Bhup Narayan Thakur, resident of VillageOrrahara, Police Station- Rajoun, District- Banka. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Special Director, Secondary Education (Sanskrit), Bihar, Patna.

3. The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna.

4. The Secretary, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna.

5. The District Education Officer, Banka.

6. The Ad-hoc Managing Committee of Sitabi Yadav Sanskrit Primary cum Middle School, Chanderi Mirzapur, Police Station- Rajaun, District- Banka. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajib Ranjan Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh ,AAG-13 Ms. Sunita Kumari, AC to AAG-13 For the Sanskrit Shiksha Board :

Mr. S. S. Sundram, Advocate Mr. Shashank Shekar Jha, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 05-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Bihar State Sanskrit Shiksha Board (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board').

2. The petitioner has moved the Court being aggrieved by the order contained in Memo No. 521 dated 17.02.2016, by the Chairman of the Board, by which the resolution taken by the Managing Committee of the school in question, suspending the petitioner and appointing another person as Incharge Headmaster has been approved.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the Board

Patna High Court CWJC No.5046 of 2016 dt.05-09-2017 2/2 pointed out that under Section 24 of the Bihar State Sanskrit Shiksha Board Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') an appeal lies before the officer nominated by the State Government. It was submitted that the Joint Director, Secondary Education has been nominated as the person to exercise power under the aforesaid section.

4. Faced with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition be disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to approach the forum in terms of Section 24 of the Act.

5. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed off with liberty aforesaid.

6. If such an appeal is filed before the competent authority under Section 24 of the Act, within one month from today, the same shall be considered and disposed off on merits expeditiously and latest within a period of two months from the date of its filing. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U