Patna High CourtL.P.A/126/2014dismissed

Kumari Rekha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-04-08Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah,Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.126 of 2014 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18544 of 2009 =========================================================== Kumari Rekha, Wife Of Ranjit Kumar, Daughter Of Shri Anuplal Paswan Resident Of Mohalla- Commissionery Bazar, P.S.- Sheikhpura, District- Sheikhpura .... .... Appellant

Versus

1. The State of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director, Primary Education, Government Of Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Sheikhpura

4. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Sheikhpura

5. The Block Education Extension Officer, Sheikhpura

6. The Block Development Officer, Sheikhpura

7. The District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority Tribunal, Sheikhpura

8. Smt. Madhulata Kumari, Wife Of Shree Ram Balak Paswan, Resident Of Village- Faridpur, P.O.- Audhe, P.S. And District- Sheikhpura .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA) Date: 08-04-2016 The order dated 20th September, 2013 is the subject matter of challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal, wherein cancellation of the appointment of the appellant vide order dated 12th January, 2008 by the District Teachers Appellate Authority, Sheikhpura, was not interfered with by the learned Single Bench. The private respondent has obtained 60.44% marks, whereas the appellant got 57.88% marks. Thus, the appellate authority

Patna High Court LPA No.126 of 2014 dt.08-04-2016 2/2 found that the appellant was wrongly appointed and the candidate higher in marks was ignored. That is the order passed by the learned Single Judge as well.

We do not find any error in the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge that the candidate higher in marks than the present appellant could not be ignored.

This appeal is accordingly dismissed.

(Hemant Gupta, J) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) mrl U