Aasiya Salma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3109 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19486 of 2014 ====================================================== 1.

Aasiya Salma Wife of Late Sameem Aalam Resident of 503, B. Block, Deepganga Apartment, Ashok Raj Path, Chauhatta, Patna-800004, P.S.- Pirbahore, District-Patna 2.

Meena Kumari Wife of Sri Ravindra Kumar R/o Patna High School Campus Quarter No. 9 (old) Gardanibagh, P.O.-Anishabad, Patna 3.

Banshidhar Singh Son of Late Chandrika Singh R/o Village-Dhanganyee, P.S. Bikramganj, District Rohtas at Sasaram 4.

Md. Hassan Son of Late Molvee Md. Masood R/o Village-Madhopur, P.S.- Chiraiya, Bhaya Chiraiya, District-East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Sri R.K. Mahajan, the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department (Now Education Department), Bihar, Patna 2.

Sri Shushil Kumar the Director (Administration), Human Resources Development Department, (Now Education Department), Bihar, Patna 3.

Sri Girwar Dayal Singh the Director (Secondary Education), Bihar, Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jai Prakash Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, AAG 15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 01-08-2023 Heard the parties.

The present petition has been preferred for compliance of the order dated 26.09.2018 read with 31.10.2018 passed in CWJC No. 19486 of 2014.

Learned State Counsel has straightaway taken this Court to the order passed by the Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna communicated to the petitioners vide memo no.

Patna High Court MJC No.3109 of 2019(2) dt.01-08-2023 2/2 1810 dated 23.09.2019 by which the claim of the petitioners has been rejected (Annexure B to the show cause on behalf of the opposite party 3).

It is the case of the petitioners that the opposite parties are deliberately discriminating him and while allowing the case of others, his case has been rejected.

The petitioners are well advised to challenge the order in Writ Court.

The MJC No. 3109 of 2019 stands disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Neha/- U