The Managing Committee, Madarsa Islahul Banat And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1150 of 2016 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8892 of 2014 ======================================================
1. The Managing Committee, Madarsa Islahul Banat, Nayatola, Bholamari, P.S. and P.O.- Amdabad, District- Katihar through its Secretary
2. Md. Maqbul Husain, S/o Late Mansur Ali, resident of Bholamari, P.S. and P.O.- Amdabad, District- Katihar, the Secretary, Madarsa Islahul Banat, Nayatola Bholamari P.S. and P.O.- Amdabad, District- Katihar. .... .... Petitioners - Appellants
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, New Secretariat, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, New Secretariat, Patna
3. The Special Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Secondary Education (Madarsa), Govt. of Bihar, Patna
4. The Chairman, Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna
5. The Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna through its Secretary
6. The District Education Officer, Katihar
7. The Block Education Officer, Kursaila, District- Katihar
8. Fake Managing Committee, Madarsa Islahul Banat, Nayatola Bholamari, P.S. and P.O.- Amdabad, District- Katihar through its Secretary (Fake)
9. Md. Belal Hussain S/o Late Haji Lutfur Rahman, resident of Bholamari, P.S. and P.O.- Amdabad, Katihar, the Secretary, Madarsa Islahul Banat Bholamari P.S. and P.O.- Amdabad, Katihar.
.... .... Respondents - Respondents ====================================================== Appearance:
For the Appellant/s : Mr. T.N. Maitin, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, Advocate.
For the Respondents-State: Mr. A.K. Sinha, GA 1. For the Madarsa Board: Mr. Md. Rashid Alam, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 17-04-2017 In the light of the factual dispute that which is the actual Madarsa having recognition of the Madarsa Board and entitled to represent the interest of the teachers, the learned Writ
Patna High Court LPA No.1150 of 2016 (4) dt.17-04-2017 2/2 Court having relegated the petitioners to take recourse to the remedy available by filing a suit for declaration of such disputed question of fact which cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution, we are of the considered view that the learned Writ Court has not committed any error warranting reconsideration. The appeal is dismissed.
(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) Dilip, AR U