IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1054 of 2010 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18545 of 2009 ====================================================== 1. Geeta Kumari W/O Ram Nagina Prasad, D/O Sitaram Sah R/O Vill.- Bhaluaha, P.O. Hanuman Nagar (Madhe Sara) P.S. Sonbarsa, Distt.- Sitamarhi …Petitioner .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna 4. The D.S.E. Sitamarhi 5. The B.E.E.O., Choraut, Sitamarhi 6. The B.D.O. Choraut, Sitamarhi 7. The District Teacher Appointment Appellant Authority, Sitamarhi 8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Choraut West, Sitamarhi 9. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Choraut West, Sitamarhi 10. Shakuntala Kumari W/O Ramesh Kumar Mahto R/O Vill.- Chandra Saina, P.O. Choraut, P.S. Pupri, Distt.- Sitamarhi …Respondents .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra 2, Advocate Mr. Varun Kumar I, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sheojee Prasad, GP 2 ====================================================== 3 22-11-2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. The Writ Court has dismissed writ petition preferred by the appellant on account of finding given by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Sitamarhi that on the date of counselling the appellant/ writ petitioner failed to produce Patna High Court LPA No.1054 of 2010 (3) dt.22-11-2011 2 the original certificates of educational qualification to support her claim. The Tribunal has recorded that no receipt showing submission of original educational certificates was available with the appellant. Subsequently a document was produced before the Writ Court containing only an initial dated 30.10.2007 which was the date of counselling, was not found reliable. That document has been annexed as Annexure- 1 to the memo of this appeal. The receipt itself is for a different purpose dated 30.12.2006 showing that the appellant had submitted her application for appointment. But under the said receipt allegedly the Panchayat Secretary had given his signature in short on the date of counseling i.e. 30.10.2007. The initial is not indicative of the fact that any original educational certificate was submitted for the purpose of counselling. This document was brought on record after the decision by the Appellate Tribunal. Hence, in our view, the Writ Court committed no error in not interfering with the findings of the Tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. sk (Shiva Kirti Singh, J) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)