← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/3835/2019allowed

Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, v. The State Of Bihar.

2022-11-02Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No 3835 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 17366 of 2016 ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, S/o Sri Amar Nath Tiwary, R/o Village- Rampur, P.O.- Manikpur, P.S.- Meniya, District- Balia, At present village- Bikrampur, Daria, P.O.- Patar, P.S.- Raghunathpur, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Principal Secretary, Secondary Education, Human Reosurces Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Siwan. 5.

The District Education Officer, Siwan.

6.

The District Programme Officer, Establishment Education, Siwan. 7.

The Block Development Officer-cum Secretary, Block Employment Committee, Ander, District- Siwan.

8.

The Block Education Officer, Ander, District- Siwan. 9.

Satish Kumar Singh, S/o Sri Uma Shankar Singh, R/o Village- Kajipatiao, P.O.- Nandapur Amwari, P.S. M.H. Nagar, District- Siwan. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Umesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms Shilpa Singh, GA XII ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 02-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

Mr Umesh Kumar Mishra appearing in support of the modification application submits that the order of this Court dated 30.11.2018, in so far as it allows the petitioner liberty to approach the District Teacher Appellate Authority, is apparently

Patna High Court MJC No.3835 of 2019(5) dt.02-11-2022 2/2 an error since it was the order of the District Appellate Authority which was the subject matter of the writ petition. Instead of District Appellate Authority, in fact the petitioner was seeking liberty to approach the State Appellate Authority. The error is apparent on the face of the record, without any argument whatsoever.

Therefore, this Court would observe that District Appellate Authority in the order dated 30.11.2018 be read as State Appellate Authority.

This application is allowed and the order dated 30.11.2018 stands modified.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U