Disposed

Subhash Chandra Rai and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC10 Dec 2012CWJC/22552/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition, holding that petitioners aggrieved by appointment orders must first approach the Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority. Direct invocation of writ jurisdiction is improper when the statutory remedy exists. The Tribunal's order and interim directions are modified conditionally.

What did the court decide?

Writ application disposed. Private respondents' appointments remain subject to fresh Tribunal orders. Questions of delay left open for Tribunal.

Subhash Chandra Rai and Ors. Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22552 of 2011

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Subhash Chandra Rai Son Of Lal Babu Rai R/O Village-Shaherkola, P.S.-Basantpur, Dist.-Siwan.

¶5

Manoj Kumar S/O Shivji Rai R/O Village-Laheji, P.O.-Shaherkola, P.S.Basantpur, Distt.-Siwan.

¶6

Ram Karan Ram S/O Dhaneshwar Ram R/O Village-Dhanauwan, P.O.Molna Pur, P.S.-Basant Pur, District-Siwan.

¶7

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶8

Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The District Magistrate, District-Siwan.

¶10

The District Superintendent Of Education, District-Siwan.

¶11

The Member, Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Siwan.

¶12

The Commissioner, Chapra, Saran.

¶13

The Block Development Officer, Basantpur, Siwan.

¶14

The Block Education Extension Officer, Basantpur, Distt. Siwan. 8. Hare Ram Harizan The Panchayat Secretary Gram Panchayat Ram Kolana Pur, Basant Pur, Siwan.

¶15

Janardan Rai The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj, Molna Pur Gram Panchayat, Block Basantpur, Siwan. 10. Rajeev Kumar Son Of Lal Babu Singh R/O Village-Basawan, P.S.Basant Pur, Siwan. 11. Smt. Usha Devi D/O Biran Prasad R/O Village-Dhanauwan, P.O.-Molna Pur, P.S.-Basant Pur, District-Siwan.

¶16

Ashok Kumar S/O Sukul Paswan R/O Village-Subdhya Noor, P.O.Baldhayat Kail, At Present Government Of Primary School Molna Pur, Gowali Tola, Basant Pur, Siwan.

¶17

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shakil Ahmad Khan For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kr Uapdhyay Sc20 For Respondents 8 to 13 : Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶18

3 10-12-2012 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the State and for private Respondents 8 to 13.

¶19

The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 18.2.2011 passed by District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority at Siwan in Appeal No. 91 of 2011/92 of 2011/93 of 2011 and 95 of 2011 filed by the private

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.22552 of 2011 (3) dt.10-12-2012

¶21

¶22

respondents. It directs consideration of their appointment in accordance with law.

¶23

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that they have higher marks than the private respondents. The private respondents were not applicants and their names were wrongly inserted in the merit list subsequently. If the petitioners were to be adversely affected they had a right to be heard by the Tribunal.

¶24

Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that if the petitioners were of the opinion that they had higher marks and deserved to be appointed it was for them to move the Tribunal against any wrong denial of appointment. They were not parties in the appeal impugned. No directions have been given with regard to the petitioners. The remedy for them appropriately lies before the Tribunal first.

¶25

The order of the Tribunal is dated 18.2.2011. The matter relates to appointment in 2006 phase. If the petitioners were of the opinion that they have a better claim for appointment over the private respondents, they cannot invoke the writ jurisdiction at the first attempt. It was for the petitioners to first appropriately pursue matters before the Tribunal. If they did not pursue matters before the private respondents did, the petitioners have only themselves to blame. It is not the case of the petitioners that they stand to be deprived of any accrued benefit by reason of an order passed behind their back. The remedy therefore appropriately for the petitioners is to move the Tribunal first. If the Tribunal is satisfied from their submission that materials necessary for appropriate consideration was not placed before it when the order dated 18.2.2011 came to be passed the Tribunal has the jurisdiction to hear all concerned and pass fresh appropriate orders in accordance with law, discussing all aspects with clarity reflecting full application of mind to all issues arising for consideration, including the

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.22552 of 2011 (3) dt.10-12-2012

¶27

¶28

circumstances in which its earlier order came to be passed.

¶29

The interim order dated 25.4.2012 is modified to the extent that any appointment made of the private respondents shall remain subject to any fresh order that may be passed by the Tribunal on any proposed appeal by the petitioners.

¶30

All questions of delay and limitation with regard to the proposed appeal by the petitioners are left open for consideration by the Tribunal.

¶31

The writ application stands disposed.

¶32

(Navin Sinha, J)

¶33

Snkumar/-

Subhash Chandra Rai and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Chandra Rai and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Anwar Jawed Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Amit Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Amit Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Kusheshwar Pandit Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Bineshwar Nath Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Renu Bala Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.