Loading...

Md.Alamgir Ansari vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 11 February, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Md.Alamgir Ansari vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 11 February, 2011
                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                            CWJC No.14169 of 2005
MD.ALAMGIR ANSARI, SON OF LATE DR. MD. MANIRUDDIN ANSARI, RESIDENT OF
MOHALLA NOONGOLA, P.O. AND P.S. HAJIPUR TOWN, DISTRICT VAISHALI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PETITIONER

                                                    Versus

    1. THE STATE OF BIHAR.
    2. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,
       GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA.
    3. THE COLLECTOR, VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR, DISTRICT VAISHALI.
    4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, HAJIPUR, DISTRICT
       VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR.
    5. THE MANAGING COMMITTEE, TOWN MIDDLE SCHOOL, HAJIPUR, DISTRICT
       VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.
    6. THE SECRETARY, MANAGING COMMITTEE, TOWN MIDDLE SCHOOL,
       HAJIPUR, DISTRICT VAISHALI.
    7. THE HEAD MASTER, TOWN MIDDLE SCHOOL, HAJIPUR, DISTRICT VAISHALI
       AT HAJIPUR.
                                   -----------

3 11.2.2011 The petitioner is working in the

Town Middle School in the district of

Vaishali. He had filed a writ application

before this Court for payment of certain

portion of his salary. This Court directed

that the petitioner would be entitled for

payment of the salary for the reasons

contained in Annexure-2 (CWJC No. 2662 of

1978). The petitioner had to again come to

this Court as he was not being permitted to

join the school by the Principal on the

ground that he had remained absent for a

short period of time. The petitioner had

filed a representation before the District
2

Superintendent of Education and as such this

Court directed that the District

Superintendent of Education, Hajipur should

dispose of the representation. Apparently

the representation was not disposed of. It

is, therefore, not clear to this Court as to

whether the petitioner actually joined the

school thereafter or not.

The present writ application has

been filed as there was a notice issued on

11.2.2004 in a daily Hindi newspaper asking

all the teachers of the school in question

to appear before the District Superintendent

of Education, Hajipur, along with their

certificates of educational qualification,

appointment letters etc. to test the

validity of their appointments. It has been

submitted that this advertisement was issued

on a complaint lodged by some persons.

It is expected that the petitioner

must have appeared before the Committee. As

far as the claim of the petitioner that he

has not been paid his salary and has not

been allowed to join the duty, this Court

cannot pass any positive order, as if the

petitioner was aggrieved by the fact that
3

despite the orders of the Court, the

District Superintendent of Education had not

disposed of the representation of the

petitioner, he ought to have moved this

Court at the earliest, but certainly not

after 20 years to seek a direction for

payment of salary.

In the result, this writ application

is dismissed on the ground of delay and

latches.

Sanjay                                          ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)
 

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information