IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.20208 of 2010 =========================================== 1. GITA KUMARI W/O SRI RAJENDRA YADAV R/O VILL.- BARAH KURWA, P.S.- TRIVENIGANJ, DISTT.- SUPAUL ……………………. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SUPAUL 3. THE MEMBER DISTRICT TEACHERS EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY, SUPAUL, DISTT.- SUPAUL 4. SMT. MANTI KUMARI W/O SRI MITHILESH YADAV R/O VILL. & P.O.- BARAH KURWA, P.S.- TRIVENIGANJ, DISTT.- SUPAUL ………. Respondents ========================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s: Mr. BINOD KR.SINHA 2,Advocate For the Respondent/s: Mr. R.A.Singh, AC to AAG 15 ========================================== 2. 14.7.2011 The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 18.6.2010 passed by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Supaul in Appeal No. 794/2009 by which it has rejected the appeal of the petitioner stating that it has no jurisdiction to hear the matter against the order of the District Magistrate. The petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Mitra in the year 2005 and subsequently by order dated 15.12.2005 of the Mukhiya her appointment was cancelled and Smt. Manti Kumari, respondent no. 4 was appointed in her place. 2 At the relevant time under the guidelines prevailing, complaint with respect to appointment of Shiksha Mitra was to be enquired by the District Magistrate. The petitioner instead of approaching the District Magistrate, filed CWJC Nos. 1223/2006 and 2053/2006 before this Court which were disposed of along with a large number of other similar writ petitions with the direction to file representation before the District Magistrate, who shall consider and dispose of the same by speaking order. The petitioner’s representation was rejected by the District Magistrate by order dated 16.6.2008. Thereafter the petitioner did not challenge the same before this Court and subsequently, in the year 2009 she filed Appeal case No. 794/2009 before the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Supaul, which had, in the meantime, been made the competent authority under Rule 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Teachers (Appointment and Service Condition) Rules, 2006. The Appellate Authority has rejected the appeal of the petitioner on the ground that it has no jurisdiction to hear the matter after the same has been heard by the District Magistrate 3 under the orders of this Court. This Court is of the view that the Appellate Authority has taken a correct view in the matter. If the petitioner was aggrieved by the order of the District Magistrate then in that circumstance, remedy for her was to file a writ petition before this Court but instead of doing so, the petitioner has allowed the order of the District Magistrate to attain finality and thereafter approached the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority. In the above circumstances, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the orders of the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority or of the District Magistrate, Supaul considering the fact that the matter relates to appointment of Shiksha Mitra of the year 2005 and the order of the District Magistrate was passed much earlier on 16.6.2008. The writ application is accordingly dismissed. S.Pandey ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)