Sri Mohan Prasad Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11627 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Sri Mohan Prasad Singh S/o Late Kanahaiya Prasad Singh Resident of village - Parsuram, P.O. Parasi, P.S. Parasi, District - Arwal

2. Dinesh Kumar S/o Late Sarju Singh resident of village - Bedhna, P.O. + P.S. Badh, District - Patna .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Chief Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. Special Director ( Secondary Education ), Govt. of Bihar, Patna

4. Deputy Director ( Secondary Education ), Govt. of Bihar, Patna

5. District Education officer, Arwal

6. District Programme Officer, ( Establishment ), Arwal

7. The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Siksha Board, Patna

8. The Secretary, Bihar Sanskrit Siksha Board, Patna .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Shree Kant Pandey, Adv. For the State : Mr. Raj Nandan Prasad, SC IX For the BSEB : M/S Satyam Shivam Sundram & Shashank Kumar Jha, Advs.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 05-02-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel appearing for the State and the Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board.

Considering the issue involved in the present writ application, which requires scrutiny of various documents and enquiry into the facts the writ application under the aforesaid circumstance is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file representation enclosing all the relevant documents and the judgment on which the petitioners rely for disposal of the present writ application.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11627 of 2016 (2) dt.05-02-2018 2/2 In the event of such representation is filed along with a copy of this Court within a period of one month, the respondentDistrict Education Officer, Arwal, will enquiry into the matter and on verification of the records if substance is found in the claim of the petitioners, the District Education Officer will pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a maximum period of three months.

It goes without saying that in case the claim of the petitioners is found justified the respondent-District Education Officer, Arwal, will pass appropriate order with regard to payment of consequential benefit.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the claim of the petitioner and it shall be the responsibility of the District Education Officer to review the relevant records and pass appropriate order within the time so indicated here-in-above.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) SA/- U