Md.Khalilur Rahman vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 13 April, 2012

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Patna High Court - Orders

Md.Khalilur Rahman vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 13 April, 2012

Bench: Ajay Kumar Tripathi

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 77 of 2011
                   ======================================================
                   Md.Khalilur Rahman S/O Md. Habibur Rahman Resident Of Village-
                   Kashibari, P.O., P.S. And Block- Jokihat, District- Araria At Present
                   Working As Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Bhebhra Paschim Within
                   Gram Panchayat Raj Choukta, P.S- Malgaon, District- Araria.

                                                                        .... ....   Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                   1. The State Of Bihar
                   2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resoures Development Department,
                   Govt. Of Bihar, Patna.
                   3. The Director (Primary Education), Human Resources Development
                   Department, New Secretariat, Patna.
                   4. District Magistrate, Araria.
                   5. District Superintendent Of Education Araria.
                   6. Block Development Officer, Jokihat, Araria.
                   7. Block Education Extension Officer, Jokihat, Araria.
                   8. The District Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal, Araria, District-
                   Araria, Through Its Members.
                   9. Gram Panchayat Raj Choukta Through Its Mukhiya Within Jokihat,
                   Block, P.S- Jokihat, District- Araria.
                   10. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Choukta Within Jokihat Block,
                   District- Araria.
                   11. Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Choukta Within Jokihat
                   Block, District- Araria.

                                                                   .... .... Respondent/s
                   ======================================================
                   Appearance :
                   For the Petitioner/s :   Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha
                   For the Respondent/s   : Mr. Parth Sharthi Sc10
                   ======================================================
                   CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
                   ORAL ORDER

                                                ***************

03.   13.04.2012

When the matter was taken up, attention of the Court was drawn by the counsel, representing the Intervener Md. Rafay, which is I. A. No. 2732 of 2012 that he was one of the persons, on whose behest the order of the Appellate Authority, contained in Annexure- 8 came to be passed and which has been challenged in the present Writ Application along with the so called consequential orders.

Interlocutory Application is allowed.

Patna High Court CWJC No.77 of 2011 (3) dt.13-04-2012

2/3

The intervener informs the Court that same Annexure - 8, the order of the Tribunal, is also under challenge in C.W.J.C. No. 14565 of 2010, in which the petitioner is also a party and that Writ Application is pending adjudication before this Court. The present petitioner is petitioner no. 7 to the said Writ Application.

On being questioned, counsel for the petitioner informs the Court that he has not suppressed this basic fact because there is some reflection of that in the Writ Application and only reason according to him why he came to file a fresh Writ Application was because certain consequential orders came to be passed based on the order of the Tribunal.

If certain consequential orders had been passed based on the order of the Tribunal which was still a subject matter of judicial scrutiny in another Writ Application and in which the petitioner was a party, then as per proper procedure, petitioner should have filed an Interlocutory Application and sought intervention of the Court on the consequential order or amend his Writ Application seeking additional prayer in view of the subsequent developments. To file another Writ Application, challenging the order of the Tribunal independently now as well as the consequential order smokes of certain indiscretion if not cunning on the part of the petitioner with regard to the litigation.

Whatever be the explanation offered on behalf of the petitioner, this Court is not satisfied with the manner in which this Writ Application has been filed and certain interim orders have Patna High Court CWJC No.77 of 2011 (3) dt.13-04-2012 3/3 been obtained. The Court is left with no other option, but to dismiss the present Writ Application.

Let the petitioner pursue the matter in C.W.J.C. No. 14565 of 2010. The interim order if any passed earlier stands vacated, consequences thereof will flow.

If any indiscretion of such kind in future is found, this Court may not give any indulgence to the petitioner.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) SKM/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Patna High Court - Orders