Anu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16481 of 2023 ====================================================== Anu Kumari D/o Amarjeet Thakur, W/o Himanshu Kumar Thakur, Resident of Village-Salehpur, P.S. Mohammadpur, District-Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Human Resource Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.
Regional Deputy Director, Education, Saran at Chapra. 3.
District Education Officer, Gopalganj.
4.
District Programme Officer (Estb.) cum Nodal Officer, Vigilance Cell, Gopalganj.
5.
Block Education Officer, Baikunthpur, Dist.-Gopalganj. 6.
Mukiya Gram Panchayat, Ajwinagar, Block-Baikunthpur, DistrictGopalganj. 7.
Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Ajwinagar, Block-Baikunthpur, District-Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prabhakar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Madhukar Mishra ( AC to SC-16 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-12-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent/State.
2. This writ application has been filed for quashing of order dated 25.07.2023, contained in Memo No 10, issued by Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Ajwinagar, Block Baikunthpur, District- Gopalganj whereby and whereunder the appointment of the petitioner, as Panchayat Teacher, was cancelled merely on the basis of a letter issued by the Respondent No 4, that too on the basis of recommendation of
Patna High Court CWJC No.16481 of 2023(2) dt.18-12-2024 2/3 informant of the criminal case, vide Mohammadpur P.S. Case No 03/2023, without following the procedure of law, without any show cause, without giving any opportunity of being heard and in utter violation of the principle of natural justice.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the State raises preliminary objection on the maintainability of writ petition and submits that the petitioner has got alternative remedy of filing appeal before the District Appellate Authority under Rule 13 of the Bihar State Teaching Institutions Teachers and Employees (Disputes Redressal and Appeal) Rules, 2020 (for short "Rules, 2020), which deals with the power and functions of the District Appellate Authority.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the above proposition.
5. A Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Dinesh Prasad Mandal vs. State of Bihar, reported in 1984 PLJR 1002, has held that the writ court is not the remedy of the first instance where others exist. It is the remedy of last resort. If the legislature, in its wisdom, provides an extensive machinery for settlement and adjudication, it is not for the High Courts to override and nullify that mandate. Since, the petitioner has got statutory alternative remedy of filing appeal before the District
Patna High Court CWJC No.16481 of 2023(2) dt.18-12-2024 3/3 Appellate Authority under Rule 13 of the Rules, 2020, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter in its extraordinary writ jurisdiction.
6. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to file an appeal before the concerned District Appellate Authority. In the event, such appeal is filed within six weeks from today, the same shall be disposed of by a reasoned order in accordance with law after hearing the parties.
7. Needless to state here that the issue of limitation, if any, arises, the same may be considered as the petitioner was pursuing the matter before this Court.
8. With above observation & direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U