Rajanikant Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4327 of 2017 =========================================================== Rajanikant Kumar, Son of Raghunandan Paswan, Resident of village - Devdhi, P.O. Bahuriya Bigha, P.S. Barun, District - Aurangabad .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary Education Department, Patna, Bihar

3. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad

4. The District Education Officer, Aurangabad

5. The District Programme officer (Establishment), Aurangabad

6. The Block Education officer, Madanpur

7. The Block Development Officer, Madanpur

8. The Head Master, Jadish Ram Rajkiya Middle, Kewla, Madanpur, Aurangabad

9. The District Teachers Appellate Authorities, Aurangabad through its Chairman .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagandeo Yadav, Advocate Mrs. Leelawati Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Madanjit Singh, GP-20 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 21-03-2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter of similar circumstanced was decided in favour of those, who were present in the proceeding before the District Teachers Appellate Authority, but unfortunately on behalf of the petitioner no one appeared to assist the Appellate Authority and as such similar order could not be passed in the case, in the absence of proper assistance. He submits that now the State Appellate Authority is functional and as such liberty may be granted to the petitioner to approach the State Appellate Authority for redressal of his grievance. In case, such appeal is filed before the State Appellate

Patna High Court CWJC No.4327 of 2017 dt.21-03-2018 2/2 Authority referring to the case of similarly circumstanced, the State Appellate Authority will decide the appeal on its own merit after condoning the delay, if any, in view of the fact that the writ application filed by the petitioner remained pending for the last one year.

With the aforesaid liberty, the writ application stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Uday/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date24.03.2018 Transmission Date