IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15163 of 2008 Sanjeev Kumar Yadav son of Ram Chandra Yadav, resident of villalge Narkatia, P.O. Dinamo, P.S. Kusheshwar Asthan, District Darbhanga… … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 2. The Commissioner cum Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, 3. The Director Primary Education Bihar, Patna, 4. The District Magistrate, Darbhanga, 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Darbhanga, 6. The Block Development Officer, Kusheshwar Asthan Dist-Darbhanga, 7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Kusheswhwar Asthan., Darbhanga, 8. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Mahisauth Prakhand Kusheshwar Asthan, Darbhanga, 9. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Mahisauth.. ….Respondents For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajendra Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For the State: Mr. S.P. Parasar, AC to GP 19 ----------- 4 14.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. This writ petition stands withdrawn, so far it relates to the petitioner no. 1 vide order dated 19.11.2009 as his grievance has already been redressed. Originally, this writ application was filed for a direction for making payment of salary, however, it is submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner no. 2 has been terminated from the post of 2 Panchayat Teacher vide letter dated 29.10.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees that the Appellate Authority has been constituted by the State Government under Rule 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Prarambhik Shikshak (Niyojan Avam Seva Sart) Niyamavali, 2006 (as amended by Amendment Act 2008). The appellate authority is functional and hence an efficacious alternative forum is available to the petitioner. In the circumstances, this writ application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the Appellate Authority for redressal of his grievance. In case, such an application is filed within one month, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same and make all endeavours to dispose of the same on its own merit after hearing the parties concerned by a speaking order, preferably within the time prescribed under the Rules for the purpose. However, it is made clear that this Court has not formed any opinion with regard to merit of the claim of the petitioner. SC (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)