IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.703 of 2009 Mithilesh Kumar Pandey son of Sri Raj Kumar Pandey, resident of village Baharban/Belahi, P.S. Kaluahi District Madhubani. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Magistrate, Madhubani. 3. The District Superintendent of Education-cum-District Programme Coordinator, Bihar Shiksha Project, Madhubani 4. The Block Development Officer, Kaluahi, District Madhubani. 5. The Block Education Extension Officer, Kaluahi, District Madhubani. 6. Headmaster, Upgraded Middle School, Haripur Dih Tola, Block Kaluahi District Madhubani. ----------- For the Appellants :- Mr. Amitesh Kumar. For the Respondents : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, S.C. XXI ------- 3 18/08/2009 Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. The present appellant got an appointment on the basis of a certificate stated to have been issued by the Bihar School Examination Board. Subsequently, the departmental authorities on the basis of some correspondence came to the conclusion that such certificate was not a genuine certificate and accordingly the present appellant was terminated from service. At that stage, the present appellant filed C.W.J.C. No. 2608 of 2009 seeking for a declaration that the certificate is genuine and for a further direction that he should be continued in service. The learned Single Judge disposed of the said writ petition by observing that since a disputed question of fact is involved in the writ petition, such matter cannot be decided under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, observed that the petitioner in the - 2 - writ petition may file a title suit seeking for a declaration that his certificate is valid. The said order has been questioned in the present Letters Patent Appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that before approaching the civil court, the present appellant may be given an opportunity to make a representation to the appropriate authority and such representation may be considered on its own merit. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose of the appeal with the observation that it will be open to the present appellant to make an appropriate representation before respondent nos. 3 and 4 who may consider such representation on its own merit. It is made clear that this order should not be construed to mean that we have expressed any opinion on the validity or otherwise of the merits of the certificate and such matter shall be decided by the authority concerned expeditiously. It goes without saying that if the appellant is still aggrieved by the order of the authority concerned, he may pursue his remedy by filing a suit, if so advised. With the above observation, this Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of. (P. K. Misra, CJ.) (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) AMIN