Patna High CourtCWJC/7797/2017disposed

Sunita Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-02-15Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7797 of 2017 ======================================================

1. Sunita Singh Son of late Anand Mohan Resident of Village- Krishna Kunj, Ganj No- 2, Ward No. -18, Bettiah, P.S. Bettiah, District- West Champaran.

2. Abha Kumari Rao Son of late Ganesh Shankar Rao Resident of VillageNaurangabad Bettiah, P.S.- Bettiah, District- West Champaran .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principle Secretary, Dept. of Education , Govt. of Bihar,Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Dept. of Education, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna.

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

4. The District Education Officer, West-Champaran at Bettiah.

5. The District Programme Officer(Establishment) Bettiah.

6. The Block Development Officer, Barria, Bettiah.

7. The Block Education Officer, Barria, Bettiah .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundaram, Adv. For the Respondents : Mrs. Binita Singh, SC XXVIII ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 15-02-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the State.

Contrary to the direction passed by this Court vide order, dated 21.12.2017, a sketchy counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Block Education Officer, Barria, Bettiah. Prima facie Court is of the view that Block Education Officer is not the competent authority to take a decision in the light of the State Litigatin Policy, 2011. The stand taken in the counter affidavit is no more relevant in the view of the decision by the State Appellat Authority in Appeal No. 42 of 2017 and, as

Patna High Court CWJC No.7797 of 2017 (3) dt.15-02-2018 2/2 such, in stead of granting further time to respondents to file additional counter affidavit, this writ application is also disposed of in the similar term decided in C.W.J.C. No. 7437 of 2017 and C.W.J.C. No. 7595 of 2017.

With the aforesaid observations, this writ application stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) SA/- U