IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16216 of 2009 1. MD.SUFIAN ALAM, SON OF MD. SULTAN ALAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE + P.O. – BANDWAR, P.S. – NIMA CHAND PURA, DISTRICT – BEGUSARAI. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER SECRETARY, H.R.D. NEW SECRETARIATE, PATNA 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BEGUSARAI 3. THE DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY BEGUSARAI 4. THE SUB- DIVISIONAL OFFICER SADAR, BEGUSARAI, DISTT- BEGUSARAI 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION (D.S.E.) BEGUSARAI 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SADAR, BLOCK BEGUSARAI 7. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER SADAR, BEGUSARAI, DISTT- BEGUSARAI 8. CHANACHUR SINGH, MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, BANDWAR, DISTT- BEGUSARAI 9. THE SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, BANDWAR BLOCK, SADAR, BEGUSARAI,DISTT- BEGUSARAI 10. SUNIL KUMAR S/O GANGA PRASAD DAS R/OVILL JINEDPUR, P.O. RAJAURA , P.S.MUFFASIL BEGUSARAI, DISTT- BEGUSARAI 11. SATRUGHAN KUMAR S/O RAM NARESH MAHTO R/OVILL +P.O. BANDWAR, DISTT- BEGUSARAI ----------- 03/ 18.03.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing for the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that Appeal No. 399 of 2009 preferred by one Sunil Kumar, subsequent to the petitioner’s Appeal No. 181 of 2009 has been decided keeping pending the appeal preferred by the petitioner, though filed earlier. It is also petitioner’s case is that tribunal has committed error by allowing the appeal preferred by Sunil Kumar i.e. Appeal No. 399 of 2009. In both the appeals i.e. appeal preferred by the petitioner and the Sunil Kumar similar issue was involved. The prayer of the petitioner is that till disposal of his appeal by the - 2 - tribunal the order passed in Appeal No. 399 of 2009 should remain stayed and no appointment letter be issued in favour of Sunil Kumar in the light of order passed by the Tribunal. This application is being disposed of giving direction to the tribunal to dispose of petitioner’s appeal within two weeks from the date of production/communication of the order. So far staying the operation of order passed in Appeal No. 399 of 2009 is concerned, it is for the appellate tribunal to decide it. In case Sunil Kumar has also been impleaded as a party in appeal, order be passed in accordance with law. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)