Md. Azaz Ansari vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1660 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11171 of 2015
     ======================================================

Md. Azaz Ansari Son of Kamruddin Ansari, resident of village - Nawadih, P.S. - Sikarhatta, District - Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur.

4. The District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Bhojpur.

5. The D.D.C. Bhojpur, Ara.

6. The District Education Officer, Bhojpur, Ara.

7. The District Education Officer, Bhojpur, Ara.

8. The Block Development Officer, Tarari, Bhojpur.

9. The Block Education Officer, Tarari, Bhojpur. null null

10. The Mukhia Gram Panchayat, Chakia, Tarari, Bhojpur.

11. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Chakia Block, Tarari, Bhojpur. null null

12. Md. Alimuddin, Son of Md. Vakil, resident of Sikarhatta Khurd, P.S. -

Simarhat, District - Bhojpur.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhirendra Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Keshri ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 08-03-2022

No one appears for the petitioner.

Since it is a matter pending since 2015 and earlier this

Court had dismissed the case for default. Thereafter, it has been

restored. No purpose would be served in again dismissing.

Hence, I am not examining the matter on merits.

The petitioner by way of this writ petition prays to

quash the letter dated 9.2.2015 passed in Appeal and the order

dated 8.6.2015 passed by the Panchayat Secretary. The facts Patna High Court CWJC No.11171 of 2015 dt.08-03-2022

stated in the petition is that the petitioner was selected and

appointed as Panchayat Teacher in Urdu Primary School,

Chakia, Bhojpur on 13.8.2010. The respondent no. 12 did not

make any complaint before the concerned authority relating to

question of process of employment and selection of the

petitioner. However, later on appeal was preferred by him and

thereafter the petitioner was heard and order was passed to

appoint respondent no.4 in his place. The petitioner did not

challenge the order passed by the District Appellate Authority

and despite several efforts of the petitioner there is not interim

order was passed.

Considering the fact the the petitioner did not possess

the required qualification and the relevant time is over, the

Appellate Authority has rightly dismissed the appeal, hence, no

case for interference is made out and the same is accordingly

dismissed.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Ravi/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          12.03.2022
Transmission Date       NA