Patna High CourtCWJC/152/2015disposed

Mukesh Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-01-19Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.152 of 2015 ======================================================

1. Mukesh Kumar Ram Son of Sri Sone Lal Ram Resident of Village + P.O Dumri, Police Station Patori and District - Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Human Resources Development, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Vigilance Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Member District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Samastipur.

4. The District Magistrate, Samastipur.

5. The District Education Officer, Samastipur,

6. The District Programme officer, (Establishment), Samastipur

7. The Block Development Officer Mohanpur, Samastipur.

8. The Block Education Officer Mohanpur, Samastipur.

9. The Mukhiya, the Village Panchayat Raj Dumri, South Mohanpur, Samastipur.

10. The Panchayat Secretary, the Village Panchayat Raj Dumri, South Mohanpur, Samastipur.

11. Savita kumari Wife of Saroj Kumar Rai.l

12. Minta Kumari Wife of Santan Kumar Rajak

13. Pramila Kumari Wife of Dayanand Rai 11 to 13 are Residents of Village + P.O. - Dumri, Police Station and District - Samastipur.

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to GP-27. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-01-2017 In view of fact that the State Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal has already started functioning, there is no reason to keep the matter pending.

The writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority. It goes without saying that the period consumed in

Patna High Court CWJC No.152 of 2015 (4) dt.19-01-2017 2/2 pursuing the present matter i.e. from 05.01.2015 till date shall be excluded while considering the limitation matter. This order was passed in presence of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned AC to GP-27. (Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U