IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.167 of 2008 MINTU KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 15.1.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. In the instant writ application the petitioner prays for directing the respondents to properly investigate and arrest the accused, who are subject matter of Lakhnaur P.S. Case No.3/03. He also further prayed to verify the handwriting of respondent no.5 who was selected as a teacher by the B.P.S.C., as he had set up another person for appearing in the examination. He has further prayed for directing the authority to lodge an F.I.R. for forgery done in the B.P.S.C. examination. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon certain decision in respect of his contention. The learned counsel for the private respondent no.5 submits that he never applied pursuant to Advertisement No.14/96, and as such the allegations are false. He further submits that the large number of cases are pending against the petitioner.He submits that he also filed complaint against the respondent no.5 but the same was dismissed. Thereafter he filed the present writ application. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that series of litigations are going on between the petitioner and respondent no.5. The writ jurisdiction of this Court cannot be resorted for furthering mutual grievances. In this respect learned counsel has relied upon a decision in a case of Vinay vs. Md. Sattar reported in - 2 - 2006 (3) P.L.J.R. 199. In the facts and circumstances of the case the writ application is dismissed. However, it would be open to the petitioner to agitate remedy available to him in accordance with law before an appropriate forum. Anilkr.sinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)