IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14098 of 2006 1.SANGITA KUMARI, W/O SRI ANIL KUMAR, R/O VILLAGE BADAUNA, P.O. SAKURABAD, P.S. SAKURABAD, DISTRICT JEHANABAD. 2.RINA KUMARI, W/O SRI AMRENDRA KUMAR VERMA, R/O VILLAGE KURHARI, P.O. SAKURABAD , P.S. SAKURABAD DISTRICT JEHANABAD. 3.SAMA PARWEEN, W/O MD. MAKSUD, R/O VILLAE SAKURABAD, P.O. SAKURABAD , P.S. SAKURABAD DISTRICT JEHANABAD. 4.RAVI RANJAN KUMAR, S/O SRI CHANDESHWAR SINGH, R/O VILLAGE BADAUNA, P.O. SAKURABAD , P.S. SAKURABAD DISTRICT JEHANABAD. …………………PETITIONERS. VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2.THE SECRETARY SECONDARY, PRIMARY AND ADULT EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3.THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY, PRIMARY AND ADULT EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4.THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, JEHANABAD, DISTRICT JEHANABAD. 5.THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, JEHANABAD, DISTRICT JEHANABAD. 6.THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, RATNI- FARIDPUR, DISTRICT JEHANABAD. 7. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, RATNI-FARIDPUR, DISTRICT JEHANABAD. 8.THE HEADMASTER URDU PRIMARY SCHOOL SAKURABAD CIRCLE RATNI-FARIDPUR, DISTRICT JEHANABAD. 9.THE MUKHIYA GRAM PANCHAYAT SESAMBA RATNI-FARIDPUR, DISTRICT JEHANABAD. ……………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 03/ 30.08.2011 Heard Counsel for the parties. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has assailed an order of his termination on the post of Panchayat Shikshak without exhausting statutory alternative remedy this Court will have no option but to hold this writ application is not maintainable. Rule 18 of Panchayat Teachers 2 2006 Rules provides for an alternative statutory remedy and earlier it was the Block Development Officer, who had been vested with such power to look into any complaint relating to service conditions of Panchayat Shikshak which had been subsequently substituted by District Teachers Appellate Authority. Admittedly, the petitioner had not exhausted such statutory alternative remedy before rushing to this Court and filing this writ application. In that view of the matter, this writ application is held to be both premature as also not maintainable. Such an order of this Court however, shall not still come in the way of the petitioner to file a complaint in terms of Rule-18 of Panchayat Shikshak Rules-2006 before the concerned District Teachers Appellate Authority and if a complaint is filed by the petitioner before the Authority the same shall be disposed of in accordance with law. It would be also open to the petitioners to point out before the Authority that even when the services of similarly situated Panchayat Shikshak along with the petitioner were terminated by a common order, 3 part of it was held to be bad in causes of other persons in course of an inquiry by the Authority. It also goes without saying that all the pleas raised by the petitioners shall be looked into and decided by the Authorities on merits and of course in accordance with law. Subject to the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)