IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3112 of 2011 Arbind Kumar Mishra son of late Janardan Mishra at present residing in the Campus of Laxmi Sangved Sanskrit High School, Jehanabad, P.S. Jehanabad, District-Jehanabad. ………………… Petitioner. Versus 1.The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.The Special Director (Madhyamic Shiksha) Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Bihar Sanskrit Education Board, Boring Canal Road, Patna through its Secretary. 4. The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Education Board, Boring Canal Road. 5. The District Education officer, Jehanabad. 6. The Managing Committee, Laxmi Sangved Sanskrit High School, Jehanabad, P.S. and District-Jehanabad through its President, namely, Sayed Mukhtar Hussain son of late Fida Hussan, resident of Jehanabad, P.S. and District- Jehanabad. 7. Sri Surendra Kumar ‘Sunil’ son of name not known, the Secretary of the alleged Managing Committee of Laxmi Sangved Sanskrit High School, Jehanabad, P.S. and District- Jehanabad. 8. Sri Upendra Kumar, son of name not known, the Headmaster, Laxmi Sangved Sanskrit High School, Jehanabad, P.S. and District-Jehanabad. ……………… Respondents. ---------------------------------- For the petitioner: Mr.Gajanan Arun, Advocate For Sanskrit Shiksha Board: Mr. Awadhesh Pd. Sinha,Advocate For the State: Dr. Chandra Shekhar Azad, A.C. to G.A. IX. ----------- 3. 9.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsels for the Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board and the State of Bihar. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 2 12.10.2009 passed by the Secretary, Laxmi Sangved Sanskrit High School, Jehanabad, by which respondent No.8 has been appointed as Head Master of the said school as also the office order dated 29.10.2009 issued by the Secretary, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board approving the said appointment and the order dated 26.11.2010 passed by the Special Director (Secondary Education), Bihar, by which the appeal filed by Laxmi Pathak against the said appointment has been rejected. The petitioner is a teacher in the school in question. After the said appointment of respondent No.8 as Head Master was made, he did not approach the statutory authority against the said appointment. Even before the Special Director (Secondary Education), Bihar, the appeal was filed by one Laxmi Pathak and the petitioner had merely sought to intervene in support of the said appeal. The said intervention application has been rejected by the Special Director (Secondary Education), Bihar on the ground that there was no provision under the statutory rules for hearing the claim of any intervener. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has good grounds for challenging the appointment of respondent No.8, as he himself is better qualified for holding 3 the post of Head Master of the said school. The moot question is not as to whether the petitioner is better qualified or not, rather the question is as to whether he has challenged the appointment of respondent No.8 as Head Master before the appropriate forum or not. Evidently, the petitioner has not moved before it. Even under Rule 1 of Chapter XX1-C of the Patna High Court Rules, an intervention application can only be filed in opposition to the writ petition and not for supporting the same and under the Non-Government Sanskrit High School Rules, 1976, there is no provision for filing an intervention application nor such an intervention application could have been filed in support of an appeal. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the action of the respondents, ought to have independently challenged the same asserting his right in the matter. That having not been done by the petitioner, it is not open to him to approach this Court by filing a writ petition. The writ application is, thus, not maintainable at the behest of the petitioner and it is, accordingly, dismissed. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)