Patna High CourtMJC/2965/2014disposed

Anshu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-09-08Mr. Justice Mihir Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2965 of 2014 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2458 of 2014 ====================================================== Anshu Kumari W/o Arun Kumar Singh Resident of Village and P.O. Gabai, P.S. and District Sheikhpura.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Mr. R.K. Mahajan, the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. Mr. Shyam Nandan Choudhary, the District Education Officer, Sheikhpura.

4. Mr. Girish Prasad, the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Sheikhpura.

5. Mr. Jay Deo Mahto, the Block Education Officer, Barbigha, District Sheikhpura.

.... .... Opp.Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Madhukar Krishna Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 08-09-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the limited extent of direction given by this Court in the connected writ application vide order dated 25.2.2014 in C.W.J.C.No. 2458/2014 and that the office of the District Education Officer through its District Programme Officer (Establishment), Sheikhpura in its show cause reply dated 18.11.2014 having enclosed a communication to the petitioner contained in his letter no. 1409 dated 27.10.2014 has sought to convey that the case of the petitioner was considered for grant of second up-gradation (Dwitiye Unanayan) in terms of Primary

Patna High Court MJC No.2965 of 2014 (2) dt.08-09-2015 Teacher Promotion Rules, 2011 and the petitioner was directed to furnish proof of satisfactory rendering of her service for last three years, this Court must now hold that the opposite parties in a sense had complied the directions given in the aforesaid order of this Court.

Thus, if the petitioner has also submitted the proof of his satisfactory rendering of service as desired in the aforesaid letter of the District Programme officer (Establishment) dated 27.10.2014, the consequential/ necessary decision, if not taken bynow, must be taken in a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.

With the aforementioned observation, this application is disposed of.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) surendra/- U