IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.13221 OF 2004 JAWAHAR SAHNI, SON OF LATE SUMRIT SAHNI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HEMPUR, GORPARA, POLICE STATION NAVHATTA, DISTRICT SAHARSA VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE COMMISSIONER –CUM- SECRETARY, SECONDARY EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PURNEA DIVISION, PURNEA 5. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, ARARIA 6. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION –CUM- SUB DIVISIONAL EDUCATION OFFICER –CUM- DRAWING DISBURSING AUTHORITY, UCHCH VIDYALAY, SIMARVANI, BHARGAMA 7. SAIYAD KAMARU JAMA, AT PRESENT ASSISTANT TEACHER HIGH SCHOOL SIMARVANI, DISTRICT ARARIA ******* 3 09/12/2010 The petitioner has challenged Annexure-1 by which respondent no. 7 has been made the Headmaster (Incharge) of High School, Simarvani, district Araria as it has been alleged that the petitioner was absent since 16.10.2003. The examination in the said school was due to commence and it was urgently required that someone should be Incharge of the School to conduct the examination, marking the presence of the teachers etc. It appears that Annexure-1 is the temporary arrangement and as such, the petitioner cannot have any objection to it since he had remained absent from the school. The contention of the petitioner is that he was not absent from the school, no show cause was issued to the petitioner before passing of the impugned order and 2 that the order is punitive in nature and the actions of the respondent State is without any basis. A counter affidavit has been filed in which it is said that the Annexure-1 was issued by way of stop gap arrangement and that action has been taken by suspending the petitioner on 02.11.2004 and he is also facing the departmental proceeding. Considering that Annexure-1 is nothing but a stop gap arrangement, this Court does not feel it proper to interfere with the order concerned. As far as the order of suspension and departmental proceedings are concerned, the petitioner would have the liberty to raise all questions before the concerned authority. This writ application is dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )