Sulekha Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17555 of 2022 ====================================================== Sulekha Kumari D/o Madan Saw R/o Village- Patwasarai, P.O.- Kadirganj, District- Nawada, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Director (Administration)-cum-Additional Secretary, Education, Department of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director of Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

5.

The District Magistrate, Darbhanga, Bihar.

6.

The District Superintendent of Education, Darbhanga. 7.

The District Programme Officer (Estb.), Darbhanga. 8.

Block Development Officer, Jale, Darbhanga.

9.

The Block Education Officer (Estb.) Darbhanga. 10.

Block Employment Unit, Jale through its Chairman. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey :

Ms. Sulekha Kumari For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Madanjeet Kumar (Gp20) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-12-2023

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner appears in person and submits that the respondents be directed to appoint the petitioner on the post of teacher at the block level against the seats of extremely backward classes, female category.

3. Due to indifferent and callous attitude of the respondents, the petitioner has not been considered for

Patna High Court CWJC No.17555 of 2022(5) dt.19-12-2023 2/3 appointment. She further submits that on the date of counselling i.e., 07.08.2021, the petitioner was present for the purpose of counselling but her name was not called out for counselling by the employment unit. She further submits that the petitioner has secured 53.69 per cent of marks, however, only five candidates of extremely backward classes, female category, were appointed having 62.21 per cent marks.

4. Learned counsel for the State, submits that the persons, securing higher marks than the petitioner, have been appointed and for the sixth post, counselling of another candidate, Khushboo Kumari was going on but the petitioner created ruckus during the process of counselling and as such, the counselling was stopped.

5. According to the learned counsel for the State, Khushboo Kumari obtained 61.90 per cent marks which is more than the marks obtained by the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the State next submits that the petitioner has filed an appeal before the District Teachers Appellate Authority bearing appeal No. 30 of 2023 which is still pending.

7. In view of the fact that the appeal, preferred by the petitioner, is pending before the District Teachers Appellate

Patna High Court CWJC No.17555 of 2022(5) dt.19-12-2023 3/3 Authority, the present writ application is disposed with a liberty to the petitioner to pursue her appeal before the District Teachers Appellate Authority.

8. Accordingly, the present writ application stands dismissed.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U