IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2416 of 2011 Bharti Kumari, wife of Mohan Prasad Mukhiya, resident of village Khetas, Kalna, P.S.Kusheshwar Asthan, District Darbhanga------petitioner Versus 1.The State of Bihar 2.The District Education Officer, Darbhanga 3.The Block Education Extension Officer, Kusheshwar Asthan 4.Hare Ram Choudhary Panchayat Ex-Sachib of Gram Panchayat Raj Bhadhar, P.S.Kusheshwar Asthan, District Darbhanga, at present resident of village Bolha, P.O.Bolha, P.S.Rosera, District Samastipur 5.Smt.Suryakala Devi, wife of Baidhnath Kumar Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj Bhadhar, P.S. Kusheshwar Asthan, District Darbhanga 6.Sukh Subidha Committee gram Panchayat Raj Bhadhar through its Chairman Smt. Suryakala Devi, wife of Baidhnath Kumar Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj Bhadhar, P.S. Kusheshwar Asthan, District Darbhanga 7.Smt.Sunita Kumari, D/o Jaiwachh Sahni, resident of village + P.S. Rosera, District Samastipur 8.Member of District Teacher Appointment Appellate Tribunal Bal Bhaderpur, Laheriasarai, Darbhanga-------------------------------- respondents ----------- For the petitioner :Mr.Pashupati Pd.Sinha, Advocate For the State :Mr.S.K.Ranjan, AC to S.C.15 ----- 2. 30.8.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 29.10.2010 passed in Appeal No. 25 of 2010 by the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Darbhanga. The case of the petitioner is that she was an applicant for the post of Panchayat Teacher in Gram Panchayat Raj Bhadhar in the year 2006 and had appeared in the counseling on 14.11.2006 but her name did not appear in 2 the provisional merit list although in the letter dated 14.11.2006 issued by the then Panchayat Secretary it was mentioned that the petitioner did appear in the counseling held on 14.11.2006. The Appellate Authority had directed the appearance of the then Panchayat Secretary to defend the letter dated 14.11.2006 issued by him regarding counseling of the petitioner, who appeared and denied that he had signed the letter, rather he stated that the petitioner had made pressure upon him by various means including filing of criminal cases and could get certain documents signed by him. It was also the case of the Panchayat Secretary that the petitioner had another sister from the same parents and the difference of age as per their certificates between the two sisters is 21 days. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances on the evidence before him, the Appellate Authority came to the conclusion that the petitioner had not appeared either in the general counseling held on 14.11.2006 or on fresh counseling held 19.11.2007 and for the said reason it has rejected the claim of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the letter dated 14.11.2006 issued by 3 the then Panchayat Secretary but the same has not been believed by the Appellate Authority on the basis of the statement of the Panchayat Secretary and this Court does not see any reason to take a different view of the matter. The findings recorded by the Appellate Authority are based on the materials on the record and this Court in its writ jurisdiction will not interfere with the same unless the same is found to be perverse. There is no reason for this Court to hold that the findings recorded by the Appellate Authority are perverse. The writ application is devoid of merit and it is, accordingly, dismissed. (Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.) Spal/