IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11025 of 2010 1. ASHOK KUMAR PASWAN S/O SRI AGAM LAL PASWAN R/O VILL.- NIRMALI, WARD NO.8, P.S.- NIRMALI, DISTT.- SUPAUL Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT TEACHER EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY, SUPAUL 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SUPAUL 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION - CUM - DISTRICT PROGRAMME CO-ORDINATOR SARBA SIKSHA ABHIYAN, SUPAUL 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MARAUNA, P.S.- MARAUNA, DISTT.- SUPAUL 7. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, MARAUNA, P.S.- MARAUNA, DISTT.- SUPAUL 8. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, SISAUNI P.S.- MARAUNA, DISTT.- SUPAUL 9. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ SISAUNI P.S.- MARAUNA, DISTT.- SUPAUL 10. BIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTI S/O LATE BALDEV SAFI R/O VILL.- NIRMALI, WARD NO.9, P.S.- NIRMALI, DISTT.- SUPAUL ----------- 2 14/03/2011 This is an old and stale claim of 2006 which has now been raised on the bogey or claim that persons having lesser marks have been appointed at the cost of the petitioner. The District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority has held that since no application of the petitioner was pending before any authority, his appeal is - 2 - rejected. The Appellate Authority has also categorically said that the petitioner has not produced any material before the Authority nor there is any evidence available on record in this regard. It is not the duty of the Tribunal to chase the bogey of a claim at the instance of an aggrieved person as and when it suits him. No interference is required with the impugned order. This writ application is dismissed, especially in view of the fact that the appointment relates to the year 2006. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)