IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10937 of 2002 VIJAY KUMAR SHARMA, S/O Late Ram Parya Sharma, Resident of Village Lachhu Chaper, P.O. Pokharya Rai, P.S. Chanpatia, District West Champaran. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The Director, Secondary Education, Department of primary, Secondary and Public Education, patna. 3.The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 4.The Collector, West Champran, Bettiah. 5.The Certificate Officer, West Champara, Bettiah. ----------- 3 25/6/2010 No one appears for the petitioner. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “(i)Issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing office order dated 8.7.02 (Annexure 2) issued by respondent no.3 where by the appointment of petitioner has been held illegal and it has been ordered that the pay and other payment received by the petitioner should be recovered. (ii)Issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing notice dated 12.8.02 (Annexure 3) issued by the respondent no.5 under section 7 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act for recovery of Rs.141857.” Having perused the impugned order it becomes clear that the petitioner, an Accountant in the office of the District Education Officer, Bettiah, was facing allegation of appointment on a forged paper. It was also found that the petitioner was made accused in Bettiah Town P.S. Case No.228 of 2002 for embezzlement and misappropriation of the government fund by drawing pension of the fictitious retired employees. It has further transpired that he had been suspended on 10.6.2002 whereafter a 2 departmental proceeding was undergone and the authority, the Regional Deputy Director of Education had removed the petitioner from service by holding that the appointment and continuation of the petitioner was based on forged and fraudulent documents materials. Such order of the Regional Deputy Director of Education being appealable order, this writ application in absence of appeal filed by him in the first instance is not maintainable. The petitioner’s grievance as with regard to initiation of certificate proceeding for recovery of the amount drawn on the basis of the forged document also cannot be looked into in this writ application, inasmuch as, in a separate proceeding under Bihar Public Demand Recovery Act the petitioner could have filed his objection under section 9 of the Act. Be that as it may, as both the relief prayed in this writ application, in presence of statutory alternative remedy, cannot be gone into and adjudicated in the first instance by this Court there is no other option but to dismiss this writ application. That being so, this application is accordingly dismissed. Abhay Kumar ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)