Shah Mohammad Khan vs The State of Jharkhand, The Director (Secondary Education), Govt of Jharkhand, Ranchi, The District Education Officer, Palamau and The Principal, Project Kartick Oraon High School, Manatu

Hon''ble Mr Justice P.P. Bhatt

Petitioner, by way of filing this writ petition, has challenged the findings of the inquiry report dated 18.12.2003 and the order dated 1.3.2004 passed by the respondents based on the findings of the inquiry report.

It is mainly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent-authority did not consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner and passed an order without proper application of mind.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that alternative efficacious remedy of preferring an appeal under Rule 819 of the Bihar Education Code is available to the petitioner.

Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the respondents, this writ petition is not maintainable and ought to be dismissed on that ground alone.

Considering the aforesaid rival submissions and on perusal of the papers, it appears that petitioner, by way of filing this writ petition, has challenged the inquiry report dated 18.12.2003 and the order passed by the respondent-authority on 1.3.2004. I find substance in the argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that there is alternative efficacious remedy of preferring an appeal under Rule 819 of the Bihar Education Code is available to the petitioner, and therefore, the petitioner is required to be directed to approach the appellate authority by preferring an appeal under the said Rule, wherein he can raise all the contentions available to him.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition, the prescribed time limit for preferring an appeal is lapsed and therefore, the delay caused, on account of pendency of this writ petition, may not come in the way of preferring appeal, to which the learned counsel for the respondents has no objection.

Accordingly, the appellate authority may consider this aspect while entertaining the appeal which may be filed by the present petitioner.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands dismissed with a liberty to file appeal against the impugned order.