← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/11600/2023dismissed

Tarkeshwar Das v. The State Of Bihar

2023-12-04Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11600 of 2023 ====================================================== Tarkeshwar Das S/O Late Baidhnath Das, Resident of Village- Dihi Siroman, P.O.- Pir Maker, P.S.- Maker, District- Saran. PIN- 841215. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

2.

The Additional Chief Secretary, Vigilance, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The District Magistrate, Saran.

4.

The District Education Officer, Saran.

5.

The District Programme Officer, Establishment, Saran. 6.

The Block Development Officer, Maker, District- Saran. 7.

The Block Education Officer, Maker, District- Saran. 8.

The Police Inspector cum Assistant Investigating Officer, Niyojit Teacher Investigation Chapra, Vigilance Patna.

9.

Vijendra Ram, S/O Late Vishwanath Ram, Incharge Head Master, High School Cum K.G.B.V. type III, Bahga Koal, Panchayet Maker, P.S.- Maker, District- Saran ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Prabhakar Jha (Gp27) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-12-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents including the learned counsel appearing for the Vigilance.

2. This application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 10.05.2023.

3. Once, on the complain of the petitioner, the services of the respondent is terminated and subsequently his claim has been found to be genuine after enquiry.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11600 of 2023(2) dt.04-12-2023 2/2

4. The petitioner is a co-villager of the respondent No. 9 and now again the petitioner wants this Court to examine the disputed questions of fact in writ proceeding.

5. In view of the fact that the disputed question of fact raised in this writ petition, this Court is not inclined to interfere in this case.

6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for a decision on the allegations levelled by him.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U