Ashok Kumar Mishra, v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC25 Feb 2025CWJC/2021/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Clause 5(h) Education Department resolution Gazette validity challenge; Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board; Sanskrit middle school Assistant Teachers, Headmasters, Peon, Muzaffarpur/Sahebganj/Katra/Ahiyapur/Lakhanpur; prior Division Bench decision CWJC No. 985 of 2015 dated 27.03.2019; petition disposed of with liberty to seek redressal before appropriate authority; representation to be disposed of within reasonable time with reasons.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate authority for redressal of their grievance; any representation filed before the concerned authority to be disposed of within a reasonable period of time, giving reasons. ¶¶26

Ashok Kumar Mishra, Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2021 of 2020

¶2

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

¶3

Ashok Kumar Mishra, son of Sri Ravindra Nath Mishra, resident of village and P.O.- Sundrapur, P.S. Keshariya, District- East Champaran at Motihari, presently working as an Assistant Teacher, Sanskrit Middle School, Ahiyapur, Anchal- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur.

¶4

Manoj Kumar Mishra, son of Sri Ravindra Nath Mishra, resident of village and P.O. Sundrapur, P.S. Keshariya, District- East Champaran at Motihari, presently working as Headmaster, Sanskrit Middle School, Ahiyapur, Anchal- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur.

¶5

Naveen Kumar, son of Sri Radhey Shyam Thakur, resident of village and P.O. Lakhanpur, P.S. Katra, District- Muzaffarpur, presently working as a Headmaster, Saraswati Sanskrit Middle School, Lakhanpur, Anchal- Katra, District- Muzaffarpur.

¶6

Sweta Kumari, wife of Naveen Kumar and daughter of Ramchandra Prasad Singh, resident of village and P.O. Lakhanpur, P.S. Katra, DistrictMuzaffarpur, presently working as an Assistant Teacher, Saraswati Sanskrit Middle School, Lakhanpur, Anchal- Katra, District- Muzaffarpur.

¶7

Prem Sheela Devi, wife of Raj Kishore Sah, resident of village and P.O. Lakhanpur, P.S. Katra, District- Muzaffarpur, presently working as Peon, Saraswati Sanskrit Middle School, Lakhanpur, Anchal- Katra, DistrictMuzaffarpur.

¶8

... ... Petitioner/s

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶11

The Joint Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶12

The Special Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

¶13

The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur, District- Muzaffarpur.

¶14

The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Muzaffarpur, DistrictMuzaffarpur.

¶15

The Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Boring Canal Road, Patna through the Secretary.

¶16

The Chairman, The Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Boring Canal Road, Patna.

¶17

... ... Respondent/s

¶18

============== Appearance :	========================================
For the Petitioner/s	: Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, Advocate Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate
For the State For the Board ==============	: Mr. Priyadarshi Matri Sharan, AC to AAG-15 : Mr. Chandra Shekhar Kumar Singh, Advocate ========================================

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.2021 of 2020 dt.25-02-2025 2/3

¶20

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶21

Date : 25-02-2025

¶22

The issues raised in the present petition with respect to the validity of Clause 5(h) of the resolution of the Education Department, published in the Gazette, has already been decided by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 27.03.2019 passed in CWJC No. 985 of 2015.

¶23

The issue does not require any further

¶24

deliberation.

¶25

If the petitioners are in any way aggrieved by the action of the respondents, it would be open for them to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of their grievances. However, this petition would not survive for discussing the validity of the aforenoted clause in the resolution of the Government.

¶26