High Court Patna High Court - Orders

The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors vs Surendra Nath Chaubey &Amp; Anr on 22 June, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors vs Surendra Nath Chaubey &Amp; Anr on 22 June, 2010
                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   LPA No.535 of 2009
                1.    THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL
                      SECRETARY,         HUMAN            RESOURCES
                      DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR,
                      PATNA
                2.    THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, BIHAR,
                3.    THE    REGIONAL    DEPUTY       DIRECTOR   OF
                      EDUCATION, SRAN DIVISION, CHAPRA
                4.    THE    DISTRICT       EDUCATION       OFFICER,
                      GOPALGANJ
                5.    THE RANGE EDUCATION OFFICER, GOPALGANJ
                6.    THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, GOPALGANJ
                7.    THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER-
                      CUM-CHAIRMAN,       DISTRICT        EDUCATION
                      ESTABLISHMENT COMMITTEE, GOPALGANJ
                8.    THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, GOPALGANJ

                                    Versus
                1. SURENDRA NATH CHAUBEY S/O LATE BADRI
                   NATH CHAUBEY, R/O VILLAGE - CHANDAUR, P.O.
                   TARWA PARASIA, P.S. DARAULI, SIWAN
                            .....PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IST SET

                2.THE    HEADMASTER-CUM-DRAWING       AND
                DISBURSING OFFICER, GOVT. BASIC SCHOOL
                CHAILWA, ANCHAL KUCHAIKOT, GOPALGANJ
                          ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT 2ND SET
                                 -----------

3 22/6/2010 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and

learned counsel for the respondent no.1/ writ petitioner.

Learned counsel for the appellants has brought to

our notice a Division Bench judgment dated 22nd May,

2009, whereby LPA. No.448 of 2009 (The State of Bihar

and others Vs. Yogendra Rai) and several analogous appeals
2

were disposed of. It is not in dispute that this matter is

identical and, admittedly, shall be governed by the said

judgment and order dated 22.5.2009.

This appeal is, accordingly, disposed of in terms

of the said judgment and order.

Learned counsel for the respondent no.1/writ

petitioner wants that the factum of the writ petitioner

having retired from the service should be mentioned in this

order. Accordingly, that submission is noted.

( R. M. Doshit, CJ.)

(Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)
Neyaz/