IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.432 of 2008 Sanjit Kumar, Son of Sri Ram Parwesh Singh, Resident of Village Bauna, Post Office Kinger, Police Station Sigauri, District Patna……………………………………………………………………..Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar. 2. District Magistrate, Patna. 3. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Paliganj, Patna. 4. Block Development Officer, Paliganj-cum- Executive Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Kelyanpur, Paipura. 5. Director, Panchayat Raj, Bihar, Patna. 6. District Panchayat Raj Officer, Patna. 7. Gram Kachhari, Kalyanpur, Paipura, Paliganj. 8. Sarpanch Gram Kachhari Cum Chairman, Selection Committee Gram Kachhari, Paliganj, Patna. 9. Secretary, Gram Kachhai Kalyanpura, Paipura, Paliganj, Patna. 10. Block Panchayati Raj Officer, Paliganj, Patna. 11. Vidya Bhushan Tiwary, Son of Sri Ram Sewak Tiwary, residence at Village Milky, P.O. Achchhua, P.S. Paliganj, District Patna…………………………………………………………………………………Respondents ----------- 4 17.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by appointment of newly added respondent no.11 as Nyaya Mitra. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he was more eligible and had preferential right to be considered, he has been ignored in favour of respondent no.11. 2 Under Rule 12 of the Bihar Gram Katchheri Nyaya Mitra (Employment, Service Conditions and Duty) Rule 2007, a forum for filing a complaint within 30 days of appointment is provided before the S.D.O. The S.D.O. has to decide the complaint within 30 days and against the same, in terms of Rule 13 of the Rules, a forum for filing an appeal is provided before the Collector. Clearly, petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy to ventilate his grievances. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has already filed his complaint before the S.D.O., Patna as far back as on 07.11.2007 and has also filed his representation before the Collector, Patna on 08.11.2007, copies whereof are Annexure-5 series. He submits that till now the S.D.O. has not considered the complaint of the petitioner and has not passed final orders on the same. In terms of Rule 12 of the Rules, S.D.O. has to perform statutory duty in considering the complaints filed before 3 him and taking a final decision within 30 days. Respondent-S.D.O. should have done that in terms of the provisions of the Rules which he has not done. There is nothing in the counter affidavit to contradict this stand of the learned counsel for the petitioner. In the circumstances, this application is disposed of with a direction to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna to consider the complaint of the petitioner, issue notice, hear the parties and take a final decision on the same, positively within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is directed that S.D.O. will not raise any question of limitation or any technical objection in considering the complaint of the petitioner on merits. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)