Rajiv Kumar Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5982 of 2013 ======================================================

1. Rajiv Kumar Ranjan Son Of Sri Sheo Nath Sharma Resident Of Village - Chhet Sandalpur, P.O. And P.S. Sahebpur Kamal, District - Begusarai .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Education Departent, Government Of Bihar, Patna

3. The Director, Primary Education, Education Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna

4. The Member, District Teacher Appointment Appellate Authority, Begusarai

5. The District Magistrate, Begusarai

6. The District Education Officer, Begusarai

7. The Block Development Officer, Balia Block, District - Begusarai

8. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayatraj, Pokharia, Block - Balia, District - Begusarai

9. Janardan Sa, Ex - Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Pokharia, Block - Balia, District - Begusarai

10. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Pokharia, Block - Balia, District - Begusarai

11. Rajesh Ranjan Son Of Janardan Sah Resident Of Village - Pokharia, P.O., P.S. And Block - Balia, District - Begusarai .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyama Prasad Mukharji : Mr. Shanti Pratap For the Respondent/s : Bandana Singh, A.C. to S.C.25 For the Respondent No.8: Sanjay Parasar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 30-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 22.12.2012 passed in Appeal No.101 of 2011 by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Begusarai, who has rejected the appeal of the petitioner on the ground that the

Patna High Court CWJC No.5982 of 2013 (4) dt.30-03-2016 2/2 petitioner has not taken any steps in the case for six to seven dates, which ultimately, forced the Tribunal to dismiss the case for non prosecution, holding that the petitioner has no interest to pursue the matter.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not taken any steps because he was prevented from taking steps on reasonable ground and he submitted that he will pursue the case faithfully and diligently.

In such view of the matter, the order dated 22.12.2012 passed by the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Begusarai, is quashed. The matter is remanded back to the Tribunal concerned to pass the order on the merits after giving proper notice and hearing all the parties. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- U