IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6562 of 2007 MANOJ KUMAR PANDEY, S/O SHEO SHANKAR PANDEY, R/O VILLAGE-MUBARAKPUR, P.S.-MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR AT BHABHUA. ……………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KAIMUR (BHABHUA). 3. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MOHANIA, DISTRICT- KAIMUR (BHABHUA). 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, KAIMUR (BHABHUA). 5. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR (BHABHUA). 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR (BHABHUA). 7. THE MUKHIYA GRAMPANCHAYAT USARI BLOCK MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR (BHABHUA). 8. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY GRAM PANCHAYAT USARI BLOCK, MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR (BHABHUA). 9. KIRAN SHARMA, D/O RAMJI SHARMA, R/O MUBARAKPUR, P.S.-MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR (BHABHUA). ………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2 13.07.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. In this writ application the first relief sought for by the petitioner was for quashing of appointment of respondent no. 9. Now a supplementary affidavit has been filed from which it appears that the appointment of respondent no. 9 has already been cancelled by the authorities. Therefore, so far that prayer is concerned, the writ application has become infructuous. The second prayer of the petitioner was for consideration of his appointment. So far - 2 - that prayer is concerned, now that the appointment of respondent no. 9 has already been cancelled, the petitioner will be well advised to file an application before the authorities concerned for consideration of his appointment on the post falling vacant on account of cancellation of appointment of respondent no. 9. If the petitioner files such an application before the authorities concerned the application shall be considered and orders in accordance with law shall be passed on the same within two months. This writ application is accordingly disposed of. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the claim of the petitioner. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)