Patna High CourtCWJC/4326/2016dismissed

Amresh Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-10-30Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4326 of 2016 ====================================================== Amresh Prasad Son of Sri Ramdeo Prasad Resident of village - Pakhnour, P.O. Kashma, District - Aurangabad .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

2. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad

4. The District Education officer, Aurangabad

5. The District Superintendent of Education ( Establishment ), Aurangabad

6. The Block Development officer, Goh, Aurangabad

7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Goh, Aurangabad .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumar Alok- SC-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 30-10-2018 The prayer of the petitioner is to set aside the order dated 18.12.2015 whereby and whereunder one Shri Munna Kumar has been authorized to work as Incharge Headmaster and the petitioner has been directed to handover the charge in view of the letter dated 24.09.2015. It has been further prayed for directing the authorities to permit the petitioner to work as Incharge Headmaster.

The learned counsel for the respondent State, referring to paragraph 6 to 8 of the counter affidavit, has submitted that not only the said Shri Munna Kumar is senior to the petitioner but also as per the guidelines the said Munna Kumar is a Trained Teacher whereas the petitioner is an untrained teacher, hence, the said Shri Munna Kumar has been rightly permitted to work as Incharge Headmaster.

Patna High Court CWJC No.4326 of 2016 (2) dt.30-10-2018 2 /2 In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the learned counsel for the State, there is no merit in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) BTiwary/- U