IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1406 of 2011
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4261 of 2006
With
Interlocutory Application No. 6781 of 2011
In
Letters Patent Appeal No.1406 of 2011.
======================================================
Awadh Bihari Pandey, son of late Jagdish Pandey, resident of Village -
Naudiha, P.S. Imamganj, Dist. - Gaya, at present, posted as Assistant
Teacher in T. Model Half Time Industrial Middle School, Gaya
.... .... Petitioner ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna
3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Gaya
4. The District Education Officer, Gaya
5. The District Superintendent of Education, Gaya
6. Head Master, T. Model Half Time Industrial Middle School, Gaya,
7. Secretary, T. Model Half Time Industrial Middle School, Gaya
.... .... Respondents .... Respondents.
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha, Advocate.
For the Respondents 1-5 :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, GP 8 and
Mr. Amarendra Kumar, AC to GP 8.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
2 28-09-2011 Re. Interlocutory Application No. 6781 of 2011.
The delay of 29 days occurred in filing the Letters
Patent Appeal is condoned.
Interlocutory Application stands disposed of.
2 Patna High Court LPA No.1406 of 2011 (2) dt.28-09-2011
2/2
Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1406 of 2011.
Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated
20th June 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC
No. 4261 of 2006, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal
under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.
The appellant, an Assistant Teacher in the
respondent no. 6 – a non-government grant-in-aid Middle School,
seeks regularization in service. Admittedly, earlier the three writ
petitions in the same subject matter were dismissed by this Court.
The learned single Judge has observed that neither at
the time of his appointment nor till date the appellant has received
training. Having regard to the orders made on the earlier writ
petitions and the appellant being an untrained teacher, the writ
petition has been rejected by the learned single Judge.
We see no merit in this Appeal.
Appeal is dismissed in limine.
(R.M. Doshit, CJ)
(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)
Dilip.