IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12737 of 2010 1. PRAMOD HARIJAN son of Asrgun Harijan, resident of village- Parghari, P.O- Bamdeo,P.S- Rajoun, Dist- Banka. 2. 2. Rewa Kumari wife of Pankaj Kumar Singh, resident of village-Lakara, P.O- Lakara, Block- Rajoun Dist- Banka. 3. anil Kumar Son of Sahdeo Yadav, resident of village- Parghari, P.O- Bamdeo, P.S- Rajoun, Dist- Banka. 4. Daya Shankar Yadav Son of Barundeo Yadav, resident of Kishanpur, P>S- Rajoun, Dist- Banka. 5. Mukesh Kumar Son of Bisheswar Yadav, resident of Kishanpur, P.S- Rajoun, Dist- Banka. 6. Manoj Kumar Son of late Sahdeo Ram, resident of village- Lakara, p. o- Lakara, P.S- Rajoun, Dist- Banka. -----Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR , through the Secretary, Human Resources Department, New Secretariat, Patna, Govt of Bihar. 2. The Director, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, New Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Chairman, Teachers Employment Authyority, Banka. 4. The District Magistrate, Banka. 5. The Block Development Officer, Rajoun, District- Banka. 6. The Block Education Extension Oficer, Rajoun, Dist- Banka. 7. The Secretary, Gram Panchayat Parghari Lakara, P.O- Bamdeo, P.S- Rajoun, dist- Banka. 8. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Perghari, Lakara, P.O- Bamdeo, P.S- Rajoun Dist- Banka. 9. Subodh Chandra Singh Son of Satish Chandra Singh, resident of village- Dhamichak, P.S- Rajoun, Dist- Banka. 10. Sanjiv Kumar Singh Son of Narayan Prasad Singh, resident of Dhamaichak, P.O- Lakara, P.S- Rajoun, Dist- Banka. 11. Sandeep Kumar son of Chamak Lal Yadav, resident of village – Kishanpur, P.S- Rajoun, Dist- Banka -----------Respondents 2. 01.03.2011 Annexure 5 is only a notice which has been issued to the petitioners by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Banka. Petitioners have rushed to the High Court stating that the earlier effort of the complainant to beget some kind of order in his favour had failed and the writ was dismissed on merit as would be evident from Annexure 4 dated 4.7.2008. Instead of rushing to the High court the petitioners would have been well advised to produce the copy of the order 2 of the High Court before the tribunal and tribunal is bound to take into consideration, such an order, if the dismissal of the writ was on merit as an adjudication made at the level of the High Court on earlier occasion cannot be scuttled at the instance of the same person who failed to get any relief from the High Court, by moving the tribunal. Be that as it may, petitioner would be well advised to bring to the notice as the tribunal the order who shall take cognizance and pass appropriate order since a notice contained in Annexure 5 has been issued. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observation. Namita ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)