Anil Kumar Sinha and Another vs State of Bihar and Others

Narayan Roy, J.—Heard counsel for the parties. The writ petitioners have prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to include their names in the list of the candidates to be appointed on the posts of Primary Teacher, as they have already completed three years'' requisite service as Adult Education Supervisors.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that since the petitioners have completed three years services as Adult Education Supervisors, they were eligible to apply for the posts of Assistant Teacher in the primary schools, but the authorities, for the reasons best known to them, did not allow them to file their applications for the same.

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 3 stating therein, inter alia, that the petitioners have actually not worked as Adult Education Supervisors. However, they managed to get the stipend after manipulating the attendance register etc. in connivance with the officials of the Adult Education Department. The authorities having detected the manipulations committed by the petitioners have cancelled the payment order and the matter is being scrutinised by the authorities and further direction has been issued to recover the excess amount paid to the petitioners.

Disputed questions of facts are involved in this writ application.

In this view of the matter, no interference is required from this end. For the reasons, aforementioned, therefore, this application is dismissed.