Kiran Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 4018 of 2013 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12652 of 2012 ====================================================== Kiran Kumari wife of Sri late Uday Shankar Yadav, Resident of Village - Barmashiya, Ward no. 8, P.S. - Mirchaiwari, District- Katihar. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through it's the chief secretary, Namely - Sri Ashok Kumar Sinha, s/o not known Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Namely - Sri Amarjeet Sinha s/o Now known Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Secretary, Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna Namely Sri Prashuram Mishra s/o Not Known.

4. The District Magistrate, Katihar Namely Sri Birendra Prasad Yadav.

5. The District Education Officer, Katihar Namely Sri Ashish Ranjan s/o not known.

6. The District Superintendent of Education, Now Distt. Programme Officer Katihar Namely Sri Shiv Narayan Mandal. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar No-1 For the Opp. Party/s : AC to GA-2 Mr. S.S.Sundaram ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 7.

13-01-2015 Heard Sri Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.C. to Govt. Advocate - 2 as well as Sri S.S.Sundaram, learned counsel for Bihar Staff Selection Commission.

The present petition pertains to appointment in respect of primary teachers for which altogether 34540 vacancies were considered. The matter was earlier examined by the Apex Court and finally, the Apex Court, by order dated 18-07-2013, has disposed of all such matters.

Patna High Court MJC No.4018 of 2013 (7) dt.13-01-2015 2/2 In this case, in paragraph 6 & 7 of the show cause, certain facts have been disclosed and it has been indicated that the case of petitioner with other similarly situated persons will be considered in accordance with law.

It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that during pendency of this petition, the opposite parties had asked for certain documents, which petitioner has already supplied.

In view of the facts, disclosed in the show cause as well as in view of the fact that matter has been set at rest by the Apex Court, the Court is of the opinion that no positive order can be passed in the present petition.

The petition stands disposed of.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay/- U