IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA ---------------- Letters Patent Appeal No.752 of 2011 ------------ Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 13-1-2011 passed by a Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6350 of 2010 ------------- Rajesh Kumar, S/O Sri Mahadeo Sah, resident of village- Amer, P.O. Nawanagar, P.S. Bidupur, District- Vaishali at Hajipur.................................................. Appellant Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, P.O. , P.S. and district- Vaishali at Hajipur. 3. The District Superintendent of Education, Vaishali at Hajipur 4. The Block Development Officer, Bidupur, District Vaishali at Hajipur. 5. The Block Education Extension Officer, Bidupur, District- Vaishali at Hajipur. 6. The Mukhia Gram Panchayat Raj, Amer Block- Bidupur, District Vaishali at Hajipur 7. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Amer, Block- Bidupur, District-Vaishali at Hajipur 8. Member, District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Vaishali at Hajipur, P.O., P.S. and District- Vaishali at Hajipur..............................Respondents ---------------------------------- 3 11-8-2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the order of the writ court. The State has created a forum called District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority in each district to examine the issue of facts relating to 2 appointment/employment of Panchayat/Block teachers. Such provision is incorporated in the Rules of 2006. The appellant/writ petitioner had the opportunity of proving his case that he was denied appointment illegally, before the appellate authority but the authority came to a different finding. According to the authority the name of the appellant/petitioner was never recommended or considered for appointment on the post of Panchayat teacher because the proceeding book of the concerned committee, Sukh Subidha Samiti did not carry the name of the petitioner. The writ court did not find it fit to consider the isolated documents such as annexures 1 and 2 and did not find any good reason to interfere with the finding of facts given by the appellate authority. Learned counsel for the appellant has tried to persuade us to enter into facts and to hold that the findings given against the petitioner is incorrect and he was duly recommended for appointment. The findings of the appellate authority are based upon perusal of the original documents called for from the concerned authority. We are not persuaded to exercise power as appellate authority in writ jurisdiction. The appeal is 3 dismissed. However, if the appellant is so advised, he may seek appropriate remedy by establishing his allegations before a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J)