Dinesh Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12295 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.
Dinesh Jha Son of Late Ram Chandra Jha Resident of Village- Bhaur, Police Station- Pandaul, District- Madhubani.
2.
Gopi Kant Jha Son of Late Indra Deo Jha Resident of village- Rampatti, Police Station- Rajnagar, District- Madhubani. 3.
Arun Kumar Jha Son of Late Satya Deo Jha Resident of village- Rampatti, Police Station- Rajnagar, District- Madhubani. 4.
Sudha Kant Mishra Son of Late Rudra Kant Mishra Resident of villageRampatti, Police Station- Rajnagar, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioners.
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4.
The Special Director, Secondary Education (Incharge Sanskrit), Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
5.
The District Education Officer, Madhubani.
6.
The District Programme Officer, Establishment, Madhubani. 7.
The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna. 8.
The Secretary, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna. ... ... Respondents.
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Hemant Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Government Pleader-18 For the Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha : Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundaram, Advocate Board ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 19-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. There is consensus at the Bar that the matter in issue is squarely covered by the judgment dated 13.08.2019 passed in L.P.A. No.43 of 2016 and other analogous cases.
3. Considering the aforesaid facts, as the case of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.12295 of 2024(2) dt.19-08-2024 2/2 petitioners stand on similar footing to that of petitioners of L.P.A. No.43 of 2016 and other analogous cases, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this writ application pending.
4. In such view of the matter, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to file a detailed representation along with a copy of this order as also the judgment passed in L.P.A. No. 43 of 2016 before the respondent nos.5 and 6 within a period of four weeks from today. Respondent nos.5 and 6 are directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioners by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a period of ten weeks from date of its filing after affording proper opportunity of hearing and pay the admitted dues of the petitioners, if any.
5. It is made clear that respondent nos. 5 and 6 shall be held responsible for non-compliance of this order within the stipulated period as aforesaid.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U