IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6943 of 2008 Ragini Verma, wife of Prakash Kashyap, resident of village Mangrawan, P.O. Mangrawan, P.S. Kachchhawan (Nasariganj), District- Rohtas. …………. Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2.The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, patna 3.The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna 4.The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Sasaram, District- Rohtas 5.The Deputy Collector-cum-Secretary, Public Grievances Cell, District- Rohtas 6.The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Education Establishment Committee, Sasaram, District- Rohtas 7.The District Superintendent of Education-cum- District Programme Coordinator, Bihar Education Project, Sasaram, District- Rohtas. 8.The Block Development Officer, Nasariganj Block, District- Rohtas 9.The Block Education Extension Officer, Nasariganj Block, District- Rohtas. 10.The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Mangrawan, Block Nasariganj, District- Rohtas 11.The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Mangrawan, Block Nasariganj, District- Rohtas 12.The Headmaster, Govt. Middle School, Mangrawan, Block Nasariganj, District- Rohtas 13.Rina Kumari wife of Ram Kumar Upadhyay 14.Durgawati Kumari wife of Awadh Kumar Singh 15.Kumari Vimala Sinha, wife of Jai Prakash Singh 16.Gita Devi, wife of Kashinath Singh 17.Meena Kumari Mishra wife of Budheshwar Nath Mishra 18.Saroh Kumar wife of Dharamdeo Singh 19.Chandrawali Kumari wife of Upendra Kumar, Respondent nos.13 to 19 are resident of village Mangrawan, P.O. Mangarawan, P.S. Kachchhawan, District- Rohtas. …………… Respondents ----------- 2. 28/07/2011 Petitioner is aggrieved by non- consideration of her case for appointment as Shiksha Mitra although she had much higher marks than respondent nos.13 to 19, who were appointed some time in 2006. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the merit list was not published in the newspapers, petitioner could not know about the time and date of counseling and selection, and when she came to know, she promptly filed complaint in January, 2007 and even thereafter. Copies of the same are Annexures- 4, 5 and 5/1. It appears that the petitioner has already filed complaints before different authorities against selection of respondent nos.13 to 19. In the circumstances, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the district authorities, i.e. the Collector, Block Development Officer or the Block Education Extension Officer to transmit the complaints of the petitioner along with all records to the concerned statutory Appellate Authority constituted under the Rules positively within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. On receipt of the records, the Appellate Authority shall issue notice to the parties, shall hear them, shall call for the original records and shall pass final orders positively within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the records. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)