IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1133 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4563 of 2008 ====================================================== Bhubneshwar Prasad Singh, S/O Bigan Choudhary, R/O Mohalla- Indrapuri, P.S.- Patliputra, Distt.- Patna .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Secretary Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Department of Primary Education, Bihar, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Tiwari Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Shahi Mr. Prasant Kumar, Advocates. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh, AAG 7 Mr. Shashi Priya Pathak, A.C to AAG-7. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3 30-08-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 25th April 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 4563 of 2008, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The petitioner, the headmaster of A.M.S.Madhya Vidyalaya, Krishnapuri, Patna (hereinafter referred to as “the School”) filed the above CWJC No. 4563 of 2008 under Article 226 of the Constitution for direction to the State Government to take over the management and control of the School in exercise of power conferred by Bihar Non-Government Primary School (Taking Over of Control) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as „the Patna High Court LPA No.1133 of 2011 (3) dt.30-08-2011 2 / 2 2 Act of 1976‟). The petition has been rejected by the learned single Judge. Therefore, the present Appeal. We are convinced that the petition was filed by the appellant under a misconceived notion that a right to compel the State Government to take over the control of the School in exercise of the powers conferred by the Act of 1976 has accrued to the appellant. In our view, the learned single Judge has rightly rejected the writ petition. No case for interference is made out. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. We also note that the Full Bench of this Court has, in the matter of Shri Sidheshwar Prasad & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. [1999(3) PLJR 490], categorically held that any recommendation made by the Committee constituted under Section 3 of the Act of 1976 is not binding and that the High Court has no power to compel the State Government to take over the control of any school. Sujit/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)