In this writ application concerning employment rejection, the High Court directed the petitioner to file an appeal before the State Appellate Authority within 30 days instead of granting relief via writ, disposing of the application accordingly.
Petitioner directed to prefer appeal before State Appellate Authority within 30 days.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10803 of 2011
====================================================== Kamlesh Kumar, S/O Nagendra Sharma, R/O Vill.- Panchratna, P.S.Ghorbanki, P.S. + Block- Basopatti, Distt.- Madhubani.
.... .... Petitioner
.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Kunal Tiwary, A.C. to G.A. 2. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
In the present writ application, the following reliefs have been sought for by the petitioner.
“ 1. That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ (s), order(s) or direction(s) for quashing
Patna High Court CWJC No.10803 of 2011 (5) dt.11-10-2017
2/3
of the order dated 27.04.2011 passed and issued under the signature of respondent no. 5 whereby and whereunder the claim of the petitioner has been rejected and earlier order dated 25.11.2009 passed in Case No. 53/2006 has been affirmed and further for a direction to the respondent authorities not to disturb the petitioner from his post as well as to pay the salary to the petitioner on monthly basis and during the pendency of writ application may stay the operation of impugned order dated 27.04.2011 contained in Annexure-1 to this application.”
The order under challenge is passed by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Madhubani. The statutory remedy lies before the State Appellate Authority.
It is further submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the case of the petitioner is covered by the issue already decided in L.P.A. No. 984 of 2014 (Manohar Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors), decided on 06.01.2016, reported in 2016(2)PLJR 474.
Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties, the petitioner is directed to prefer an appeal before the State Appellate Authority within a period of thirty days from the date of the order, which shall be disposed of in accordance with law within the statutory period.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10803 of 2011 (5) dt.11-10-2017
3/3
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the
present writ application stands disposed of.
U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's claim regarding rejection of post and salary needs to be quashed via writ or pursued through statutory appeal.
Kamlesh Kumar
The State of Bihar
The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department
The Director, (Primary Education)
District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority Madhubani
The Member, District Education Employment Appellate Authority
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
