IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4891 of 2007 1. Aashish Kumar Kanth, son of Sri Arvind Kanth, resident of village Pirnagar, P.S. Pirnagar, District Madhepura, at present posted as Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Lakshmipur Anchal, Udakishunganj East, District Madhepura 2. Awadh Kumar, son of Sri Ram Awatar Sah, resident of village Saurbazar, P.S. Saurbazar, District Saharsa, at present posted as Assistant Teacher, Primary School Kumhrarpur, Udakishunganj East, District Madhepura 3. Pulendra Kumar, son of Sri Phagu Prasad Yadav, resident of village Chandaur, P.S. Sourbazar, District Saharsa, at present posted as Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Mohimdih, udakishunganj East, District Madhepura … Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. The District Superintendent of Education, Madhepura 4. The Block Education Extension Officer, Udakishunganj East, Madhepura 5. The Headmaster, Primary School, Lakshmipur, Udakishunganj, Madhepura 6. The Headmaster, Primary School, Kumhrarpur, Udakishunganj, District Madhepura 7. The Headmaster, Primary School, Mohimdih, Udakishunganj, District Madhepura … Respondents ---------------------------------- 5. 21.9.2011 No one appears for the petitioners. Counsel for the State is present. In this writ application the prayer of the petitioners reads as follows: “(i) That the present writ application is being filed for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus treating the services of the petitioners as Assistant Teacher with effect from different dates of the year 1988, by which Secretary, Human Resources Development Department has directed to give concurrence to the services of the persons appointed prior to the take over of the Primary Schools and their services could not be recognized. (ii) Further a direction be issued to the respondents 2 to give salary to the writ in compliance of the order by the respondent no.3 in the year 1995 and 1996 issued pursuant to direction of the Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.” The respondents have filed a counter affidavit, copy whereof was served on the counsel for the petitioners on 29.8.2011 and the stand there has been taken that the petitioners had never been a teacher in Primary School, Lakshmipur, Kumhrarpur and Mohimdin under block Udakishunganj for the period they having claiming their payment of salary. In this context Paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 being relevant are quoted hereinbelow: “5. That it is submitted that the petitioners had never been a teacher in Primary School, Lakshmipur, Kumhrarpur, and Mohimdin respectively under Block Udakishunganj, District Madhepura since the period of claiming payment. 6. That it is stated that in this connection District Programme Officer (Establishment) Madhepura was asked a verification report from Block Extension Education Officer (B.E.E.O.) Udakishunganj that it is stated that in this connection Block Education Officer (BEO) Udakishunganj, District Madhepura enquired into the matter and submitted a School verification report. Vide letter no. 330 dated 25.8.2011. Headmasters of the schools also reported in this regard vide letter no. 15, 16 and 43 dated 25.8.2011, 25.8.2011 and 24.8.2011 respectively. 7. That it is further stated that after searching of Attendance Register of the said school it was found that the petitioners had never been a teacher in that school and as such the statement made in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 are not true and beyond truth to 3 acknowledge them as a teacher in this connection.” As with regard to the claim of the petitioners for payment of their salary based on an order of respondent no.3 in the year 1995 and 1996 the respondents in paragraphs 12 and 13 of the counter affidavit had also explained that no such record is available and in fact after incidence of fire on 20.11.1996 the very existence of such a record has been doubted. Copy of the aforesaid counter affidavit having been served on the learned counsel for the petitioners when a prayer was made by him to enable the petitioners to file rejoinder, adjournment was given on 26.8.2011 and again on 13.9.2011 for this purpose but no such rejoinder has been filed by the petitioners till today. Thus the aforesaid uncontroverted facts in the counter affidavit by itself would be sufficient to hold that the claim of the petitioners for payment of their salary is totally unsustainable inasmuch as neither they had been appointed nor they had worked in the period in question. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/