IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.314 of 2008
Srimati Vidya Sinha, W/O Sri Mahesh Prasad Mahto,
resident of village Gaushala Road, Panchayat
Kantia, P.S. Kadwa, District- Katihar
............... Petitioner
Versus
1.The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Human
Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar,
Patna
2.The District Magistrate, Katihar, District-
Katihar
3.The Block Education Extension Officer, Kadwa
4.Shamim Akhtar S/O not known, the Panchayat Sewak-
cum-Secretary of Kantia Panchayat of Kadwa Block,
District- Katihar
5.The Headmaster, Primary School, Nighara, P.S.
Kadwa, District- Katihar
6.Sanjeev Kumar Pottadar, S/O Late Shivam Pottadar,
the then Mukhia of Kantia Panchayat at present
posted as Assistant Teacher at Primary School
Kamrau of Kantia Panchayat, District- Katihar
7.Srimati Ranju Singh S/O Ramashish Mahto, resident
of village Gaushala Road, P.S. Kadwa, District-
Katihar
8.Narayan Mahto, S/O Late Ram Bhorosha Mahto,
present Mukhia of Kantia Panchayat, P.S. Block
Kadwa, District- Katihar ............. Respondents
-----------
2. 27/08/2010 Learned counsels agree that 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 now functional and hence an
efficacious alternative forums is available to
the petitioner and others for consideration of
all their grievances in respect of their
employment.
In the circumstances, the writ
2
application is disposed of with liberty to the
petitioner to file an appropriate application
before the concerned Appellate Authority, if
not already filed, for redressal of her
grievances. In case such an application is
filed by the petitioner within one month, the
Appellate Authority shall consider the same and
all documents enclosed therewith, including
orders of this Court in identical matters, if
produced, and other relevant records and make
all endeavours to dispose of the same on
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.
Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)