Nitish Kumar vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 26 August, 2010

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CWJC No.487 of 2008
                       Nitish Kumar, son of Sri Prabhat Kumar,
                       resident of village Chhechhni, P.S. Bithan,
                       District Samastipur, at present resident at
                       Nayatola,   Katihar,    P.S.   and   District
                       Katihar............................................................................Petitioner
                                       Versus
                 1.    The State Of Bihar
                 2.    The District Magistrate, Katihar.
                 3.    The Block Development Officer, Pranpur, P.S.
                       Pranpur, District Katihar.
                 4.    The Mukhia, Gram Panchayat Raj Barjhalla,
                       P.S.             Pranpur,            District
                       Katihar.........................................................................Respondents

                                             -----------

2 26.08.2010 Learned counsel for the petitioner as

well as learned counsel for the State

informs this Court that now the Appellate

Authorities constituted by the State

Government under Rule 18 of the Bihar

Panchayat Prarambhik Shikshak (Niyojan Avam

Seva Sart) Niyamvali, 2006 (as amended by

Amendment Act, 2008) are functional and are

now efficacious alternative forums available

to the petitioner and others for

consideration of their grievances.

In view of the submissions of the

learned counsels and in view of the

availability of the efficacious alternative

forum for consideration of matters relating

to employment of Shiksha Mitra/Panchayat

Shikshak, the writ application is disposed
2

of with liberty to the petitioner to file an

appropriate application before the concerned

Appellate Authority, if not already filed,

for redressal of his grievance. In case such

an application is filed by the petitioner,

the Appellate Authority shall consider the

same and all documents enclosed including

orders of this Court in identical matters,

if produced therewith and make all

endeavours to dispose of the same on its own

merits after hearing the parties concerned,

by a speaking order preferably within the

time prescribed under the Rules for the

purpose without going into the question of

limitation.

It is made clear that this Court has

not expressed any opinion with regard to the

merits of the claim of the petitioner.

BT                      (J. N. Singh, J.)