IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1468 of 2010 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9936 of 2010 ====================================================== 1. Naresh Kumar Sah S/O Shri Devendra Prasad Sah R/O Vill.- Rajiganj, P.O.- Ranipatra, P.S.- Mufassil, Ranipatra, Distt.- Purnea .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary-Cum-Commissioner Human Resources Development Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director-Cum-Joint Secretary Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Member, District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Purnea, Distt.- Purnea 5. The District Superintendent Of Education, Purnea, Distt.- Purnia Null Null 6. The Block Development Officer, Block- Purnea East, Distt.- Purnea 7. The Block Education Extension Officer Block- Purnea East, Distt.- Purnea 8. The Mukhia, Gram Panchayat Raj Birpur Block- Purnea East, Distt.- Purnea 9. The Panchayat Secretary Gram Panchayat Raj Birpur, Block- Purnea East, Distt.- Purnea 10. Rajeev Kumar S/O Lalitesh Gupta R/O Nawtola Line, P.S.- Purnea, Distt.- Purnea .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr Rajeeva Roy, Advocate Mr. Makardhwaj Upadhayay, Advocate For the Respondent/s : -------- ====================================================== 3 05-12-2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the order under appeal. The Writ Court, in our view, was right in not interfering with order of the District Teacher Appointment Appellate Tribunal, Purnea dated 12.5.2010 passed in Case Patna High Court LPA No.1468 of 2010 (3) dt.05-12-2011 2 No.504/09 because there was no reliable material to show notice upon the respondent no.10 who had higher marks. The Tribunal and the Writ Court did not consider the notice to be satisfactory in view of admitted stand that only a certificate of posting was shown by way of evidence in support of notice. For the post of teacher, now a person with higher marks, respondent no.10 has been found as more appropriate candidate for appointment. We find no good reason to interfere. The appeal is dismissed. sk (Shiva Kirti Singh, J) (Shivaji Pandey, J)