IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.4525 OF 2008 ====================================================== Sarwar Khan Warsi, son of Late Syed Khan, resident of village-Digha, P.S.Barachati, District-Gaya, at present residing at Gulsan Bihar Apartment, Alamganj, P.S. Guljarbagh, Patna City, District-Patna elected as Pradesh Sachiv, Bihar Pradesh Lokjanshakti Party, Minority Cell. …………………………… Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Director, Primary School Bihar, Patna. 3. The Regional Deputy Director, Primary School, Gaya Range, Gaya. 4. The Collector, Nawada. 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Nawada. 6. The Block Development Officer, Nawada. 7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Nawada. 8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Oraina, P.S. Muffasil, District- Nawada. 9. Panchayat Sachiv, Gram Panchayat Raj, Oraina, Block-Nawada, District-Nawada ………………………….. Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner: Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Vikash Kumar, A.C. to AAG.1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN 2 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 17.01.2011 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed in public interest by one Shri Sarwar Khan Warsi. The petitioner claims to be the Secretary, Bihar Pradesh Lokjanshakti Party, Minority Cell. He has filed this petition to challenge the communication dated 18th January 2008 sent by the District Superintendent of Education-cum-District Education Co-ordinator, Bihar Education Project, Nawada to the Block Development Officer, Nawada in respect of recruitment of teachers in Urdu. It states that the person to be selected as Teacher in Urdu must have opted for 200 marks’ Urdu subject at the Intermediate level. At first, we have noticed that the challenge is to the internal communication and is not related to any action taken by an authority. Besides in the matter of service conditions there cannot be a public interest litigation. The petition is misconceived, hence, rejected. Rule is discharged. Parties will bear their own cost. Patna High Court/ Dated the 17th January 2011/ Bibhash/N.A.F.R. ( R.M. Doshit, CJ.) (Jyoti Saran, J.)