IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4147 of 2007 Bina Kumari, Daughter of Sri Jagnarayan and Wife of Bhuneshwar Prasad, Resident of Village Bhakharua More, Daudnagar, P.S. Daudnagar, Dist. Aurangabad. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Secretary cum Commissioner, Department of Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Education Officer, Aurangabad. 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad. 6. The Block Development Education Officer, Daudnagar, Dist. Aurangabad. 7. The Mukhia, Gram Panchayat, Tarari, Block-Daudnagar, Dist. Aurangabad. 8. The Panchayat Sachiv, Gram Panchayat Tarari, Block Daudnagar, Dist. Aurangabad. -------- Respondents ----------- 2 16.08.2011 Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court, in absence of any counter affidavit as with regard to the solitary grievance of the petitioner for his being absorbed/transferred as a Panchayat Shikshak in a Primary School Bazarsamiti, Bhakharuamore in the district of Aurangabad, would give liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Teachers Appellate Authority, Aurangabad for ventilation of her grievance by filing a complaint in terms of Rule 18 of the Panchayat Shikshak Rules, 2006. The apprehension of the petitioner 2 that such complaint may not be entertained on account of delay is wholly misconceived, inasmuch as, the wide jurisdiction vested in Authority as with regard to deciding the complaints relating to appointment and service conditions of a Panchayat Shikshak in terms of Rule 18 of Panchayat Shikshak Rules in its wide sweep would also include a claim for posting on the vacant post in the same Panchayat. Thus the grievance raised by the petitioner in this writ petition can definitely be gone into by the said Authority in exercise of its power under Rules 18 without putting the petitioner under the fretters of any limitation, inasmuch as, this misconceived writ application had remained pending before this Court since 2.4.2007. That being so, if the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, would file a complaint confined to the grievance raised in this writ petition in terms of Rule 18 of the 2006 Rules, the District Teachers Appellate Authority, Aurangabad, in stead of non- suiting the petitioner on any technical 3 ground including that of limitation, would decide her complaint on merit and dispose it of by an speaking order. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)