IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7154 of 2006 ISHRAT JAHAN, WIFE OF AFTAB ALAM, AND DAUGHTER OF MD. ZAFRUL HAQUE, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MAHUAWA, POLICE STATION PIPRAHI, DISTRICT SHEOHAR…………………………………...PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SHEOHAR 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SHEOHAR 5. GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ AMAWA DASKSHINI, P.S. PIPRAHI, DISTRICT SHEOHAR THROUGH ITS MUKHIYA 6. THE MUKHIYA GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ AMAWA DAKSHINI, P.S. PIPRAHI, DISTRICT SHEOHAR 7. RUKHSANA KHATOON, WIFE OF AMRULLAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MAHUAWA, P.S. PIPRAHI, DISTRICT SHEOHAR …..RESPONDENTS ----------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Md. Anisur Rahman, Advocate For the State : Mr. Binod Kumar, A. C. to S.C. V 2. 08.02.2010 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to mention the correct name and address of respondent no.7 against whom petitioner has grievances, in course of the day. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State inform this Court that now the Appellate Authorities constituted by the State Government under Rule 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Prarambhik Shikshak (Niyojan Avam Seva Sart) Niyamvali, 2006 (as amended by Amendment Act, 2008) are functional and are now efficacious alternative forums available to the petitioner and others for - 2 - consideration of their grievances. In view of the submissions of the learned counsels and in view of the availability of the efficacious alternative forum for consideration of matters relating to employment of Shiksha Mitra/Panchayat Shikshak, the writ application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the concerned Appellate Authority, if not already filed, for redressal of her grievance. In case such an application is filed by the petitioner, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same and all documents enclosed including orders of this Court in identical matters, if produced therewith and make all endeavours to dispose of the same on its own merits after hearing the parties concerned, by a speaking order preferably within the time prescribed under the Rules for the purpose without going into the question of limitation. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the claim of the petitioner. B.T (J. N. Singh, J.)