Gajadhar Kumar Kushwaha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10514 of 2015 ====================================================== Gajadhar Kumar Kushwaha, Son of Late Badshah Kushwaha Resident of Village- Laxmipur Chailwa, Block- Kuchaikote Post Office+Police StationGopalpur, District- Gopalganj, Presently posted and working as Prakhand Teacher, in primary School, Laxmipur, District- Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Primary Education, Government of Bihar at Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar at Patna.

3. The Collector, Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj.

4. The District Education Officer, Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj.

5. The District Programme Officer, District- Gopalganj.

6. The Block Development Officer, Kuchaikote, District- Gopalganj.

7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Kuchaikote, District- Gopalganj.

8. The Mukhia, Gram Panchayat Raj, Sangwadih, District- Gopalganj.

9. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Sangwadih, DistrictGopalganj.

10. The Headmaster, Primary School, Laxmipur, Block- Kuchaikote, District- Gopalganj.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr. SC2- Nawal Kishore Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT 31-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner is a Prakhand Teacher and has a grievance as with regard to non payment of his salary, remedy for him at the first instance under Rule-18 of Bihar Panchayat Teacher Appointmnet Rules-2006/2012, would be before the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority.

Patna High Court CWJC No.10514 of 2015 (2) dt.31-07-2015 That being so, this writ application without exhausting the statutory alternative remedy is both premature and ill advised.

When such an observation has been made, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application in order to enable the petitioner to move before the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority for redressal of his grievance.

This application is permitted to be withdrawn with the aforementioned liberty.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) surendra/- U