Patna High CourtL.P.A/1299/2014dismissed

Akhtari Begum v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-04-21Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1299 of 2014 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17587 of 2012 =========================================================== Akhtari Begum Wife of Safiur Rahman Resident of Village- Gaush Nagar, P.O. Karlahiya, P.S. Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Appellant

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, Sitamarhi

2. The District Programme Officer, Sitamarhi

3. The A.I.E. Co-ordinator, Bihar Education Project Sitamarhi

4. The Block Education Extension Officer, Block Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi

5. The Head Master, Middle School Urdu, Gaushnagar, P.S. Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi

6. Rahna Khatoon W/o Md. Intar Ansari

7. Md. Isha Ansari S/o Md. Muslim Ansari 6 and 7 boh are R/V Koloshiya, P.S. - Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dinesh Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Madhaw Pd. Yadav, GP-23 Mr. Rajesh Kr. Sinha, AC to GP-23 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI And HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 21-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

The impugned order dated 13.03.2014, which has been challenged in the present Letters Patent Appeal, does not require any interference for the reason that the learned Single Judge has rightly held that the appellant is not holder of any

Patna High Court LPA No.1299 of 2014 dt.21-04-2017 civil post under the State, but was a volunteer with the object of motivating people to acquire education by the minority community under Talimi Markaz Centre, which is being run under Sarva Siksha Abhiyan.

Learned counsel for the State also informs the Court that such engagement was for a limited period of one year and was not life long engagement or hiring by the State. Thus, we find no merit in this appeal, it is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajeev/- U