IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5471 of 2009 BABUL CHANDRA DAS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 29.04.2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The State Government has constituted an Appellate Authority for hearing cases with regard to issues of appointment etc. of teachers. The notification creating the Authority does not contain any limitation with regard to the nature of the claims relating to appointment that may be brought before the Authority. It only replaces the statutory authority under Rule 18 erstwhile by the Appellate Authority now. Since the matter involves issue of fact, verification of record and the petitioner has an adequate alternative remedy, which to this Court is more expeditious and efficacious considering that district wise Appellate Authorities have been created, there is no occasion for this Court to interfere under writ jurisdiction. If so advised, the petitioner may pursue his remedies before the Appellate Authority which is required to decide his application in accordance with law by a reasoned ands speaking order. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into merits of the matter and the Authority shall proceed on no assumption in that regard that this Court declined to interfere on merit. It is clarified that the Court has declined interference only on the ground of alternative statutory remedy. Any such application by the petitioner is required to be decided within the time limit fixed under Rule 2 of the notification creating the Authority to be computed from the date that the petitioner files his application. The writ application stands disposed off. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)