IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.535 of 2011 Braj Mohan Singh son of Late Kamta Singh resident of village Rampur, P.S. Makhdumpur, District Jehanabad at present Assistant Teacher posted in T.Model Half Time Industrial School, Gaya… Petitioner. Versus 1.The State Of Bihar Through the Secretary cum-Commissioner, Department of Primary Education, Bihar. 2.District Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. 3.Special Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. 4.Regional Deputy Director, Education, Magadh Division, Gaya. 5.District Superintendent of Education, Gaya…Respondents. ----------- 3. 18.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the order of the writ court dated 22nd December 2010 whereby the appellant’s writ petition bearing C.W.J.C.No. 11640 of 2002 has been dismissed after holding that the case is a befitting example as to how people invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court to get illegal gains with the aid of lapses or ignorance of functionaries of the Government. The discussions made by the writ court discloses that contrary to clear guidelines and direction of the State Government issued in 1982 an attempt was made to show that the writ petitioner/appellant was appointed as a teacher in a public aided School without having requisite training. The materials to show advertisement etc. were found to be imaginary and not 2 available, because the advertisement etc were after the date of appointment. The conditional approval of appointment in 1983 gave liberty to the appellant to obtain training without any time constraints with a further stipulation that vacancy shall be kept reserved for him. Of course on fact it was found that the vacancy was never kept reserved and the appellant claimed that he has obtained training from an Institution of Lucknow (U.P.) after more than 11 years from the alleged date of appointment. Faint copy of the certificate of training did not inspire confidence in the writ court and considering the entire facts and circumstances, the writ court found that the claim of appointment itself was doubtful and definitely contrary to law which required the qualification of training for such appointment. We find no merit in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Jay/ (Shiva Kirti Singh,J) (Shivaji Pandey, J)