IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3837 of 2001 1. MD.AKHTARUL ISLAM son of late Zeyaur Rahman, resident of Khalilpura Road, Phulwarisharif, PS Phulwarisharif, District, Patna. 2. Md. Aslam son of Abdul Bari resident of Mohalla Pirbahore PS Pirbahore, District Patna 3. Md. Mustafa son of late Dr. Abdul Halim, resident of Mohalla Bakarganj PS Pirbahore District Patna 4. Rafique Ahmad son of Late Md. Nasiruddin, resident of Mohalla Sultanganj, PS Sultanganj District Patna 5. Syed Sabauddin son of late Syed Alimuddin resident of Kagji Mohalla PS Biharsharif District Nalanda Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Sri Krishnapuri, Patna through its Secretary 3. The Chairman Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Sri Krishnapuri, Patna 4. The Secretary Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Sri Krishnapuri, Patna 5. Habibur Rab son of Abdur Rab, Private Secretary to the Chairman, Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Sri Krishnapuri, Patna ------------------- For the petitioners: Sri Abhay Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate Shabbir Ahmad, Advocate For the Madarsa Board: Md. Rashid Alam, Advocate For the State: Mr. Sunil Kumar Mandal, Advocate, SC 15 -------------------- 6 16-01-2009 Heard learned counsel for the parties in respect of stand taken by the Madarsa Board in the last counter affidavit in which latest gradation list has been annexed and it has been stated that all the employees including the petitioners and respondent no. 5 have been promoted to various higher posts and none of the parties have challenged either the gradation list or the posting of the concerned employees including the petitioners. For the purpose of convenience alone the order passed on the last date, that is, 13.01.2009 is treated as part of this order. - 2 - After certain instructions learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that since respondent no. 5 has been shown junior to the petitioners no. 1, 2 and 3 in the gradation list, only petitioner no.4 may have some grievance as to why he has been shown junior to respondent no.5. However, it is clear that no challenge to the latest gradation list has been made even by the petitioner no.4 through any amendment. It was further submitted on behalf of the petitioners that although the petitioners have been shown to be promoted to various posts such as Accounts Officer, Finance Officer and Controller of Examination, as per office arrangement all the administrative and financial files are routed through their junior, respondent no.5, who has been given the post of Dy Secretary. According to the petitioners since respondent no.5 is junior to petitioners no. 1, 2 and 3, he should not be given any power to sit in appeal or control the decisions of these petitioners. So far as the above submission is concerned, it is apparent from annexure-17 to IA no. 5306/2002 that the role of Dy Secretary is only to act as a conduit for the administrative and financial files for being submitted to the Chairman through the established official procedure. The decision making power in relation to the works of the petitioners does not appear to have vested in the Dy Secretary. Taking over all view of the nature of the grievance of the petitioners and the final decision taken by the Madarsa Board to which all the petitioners have consented by not challenging those decisions, - 3 - this court finds that the writ petition filed by the petitioners has become infructuous. It is disposed of accordingly. BKS/ (Shiva Kirti Singh,J.)