IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16623 of 2007 1. Bimal Kumar Das, S/o Sri Satya Ranjan Das, R/o Vill. Lalganj, P.O. Lalganj, P.S. Khajanchi Hat, Dist. Purnea. 2. Lakshaman Kumar Rai, S/o late Hardeo Ram, R/o Village Mahesh Bathna, P.O. Haphania, P.S. Amaur, Dist. Purnea. 3. Amarnath Kramkar, S/o Salimchand Karmkar, R/o Village Haripur, P.O. Amaur, P.S. Pmaur, Dist. Purnea. 4. Ajay Kumar, Vishwas, S/o Sri Naurangi Lal Vishwas, R/o Village Pramasspur, P.O. Tarna Via Jalalgath, P.S. Jalalgath, Dist. Purnea. ---------- Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Director (Primary Education), Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Purnea. 4. The District Education Officer, Purnea. 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Purnea. 6. The Block Development Officer, East Purnea Block Purnea. 7. The Block Development Officer, Amour Block, Purnea. 8. The Block Education Extension Officer, East Purnea Block, Purnea. 9. The Block Education Extension Officer, Amour Block, Purnea. 10. The Gram Panchayat Secretary, Lal Ganj Panchayat East Purnea, Block Purnea. 11. The Gram Panchayat Secretary, Khari Mahin Gram Panchayat, Amour Block, Purnea. 12. The Gram Panchayat Secretary Rangraya Laltoti/Nitendra, Amaour, Block Purnea. 13. The Gram Panchayat Secretary Pothia Gangoli, Amaour Purnea. 14. The Mukhia of Gram Panchayat Lalganj. 15. The Mukhia of Gram Panchayat Khari Mahin Gao. 16. The Mukhia of Gram Panchayat Rangraya Laltoli/Nitendra, Amaurk Purnea. 17. The Mukhia of Gram Panchayat Pothia, Gangelli, Amaour, Purnea. ------------- Respondents ------- 3 22.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Having regard to the fact that the claim for payment of salary of the petitioners said to be working as a Panchayat Teachers, being part of their service condition, in the first instance, has to be looked into and decided by the District Teachers Appellate Authority in terms of Rule 18 of the Panchayat Teachers Appointment Rule, 2006. That being so, this application is permitted to be withdrawn with a liberty to the petitioners to file their complaint before the concerned District Teachers Appellate Authority, which will thereafter decide the matter on merit without being non- suiting the petitioners on the ground of delay/limitation, if any. With the aforementioned observations and liberty, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)