IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10763 of 2009 SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA, SON OF LATE RAM BHAJAN SHARMA, VILLAGE BATHANI, P.S. BATHANI (ATRI), DISTRICT- GAYA, AT PRESENT POSTED AS ACTING HEADMASTER, D.L.HIGH SCHOOL, HISUA, DISTRICT- NAWADA ………… PETITIONER Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3.THE REGIONAL DY.DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MAGADH DIVISION, GAYA 4.THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, NAWADA 5.SHRI DHUP NARAIN SINGH, FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN, ASSISTANT TEACHER,D.L.HIGH SCHOOL, HISUA, DISTRICT- NAWADA ……… RESPONDENTS --------- For the petitioner : Mr.Tej Bahadur Singh, Sr.Adv. For the State : Mr.Manoj Kumar Sinha, A.C to G.P.1 For Respondent No.5: Mr.Y.V.Giri,Sr.Adv. with Mr.Arun Kumar, Adv. with CWJC No.14260 of 2009 1. DHUP NARAYAN SINGH S/O SHRI RAMASHIS SINGH AT. & P.O.- HASUA (DEVI ASTHAN), P.S.- HASUA, DISTT.- NAWADA- 805103 AT PRESENT SENIOR MOST TEACHER, D.L.H.S., HISUA, DISTT.- NAWADA ……. PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR (SECONDARY EDUCATION), HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (SECONDARY EDUCATION), HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., MAGADH DIVISION, GAYA 5. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER NAWADA 6. SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA ASSTT. TEACHER / AT PRESENT INCHARGE HEAD MASTER, D.L. HIGH SCHOOL, HASUA, NAWADA ………….. RESPONDENTS ----------- For the petitioner : Mr.Y.V.Giri,Sr.Adv. with Mr.Arun Kumar,Adv. For Respondent No.6: Mr.Tej Bahadur Singh,Sr.Adv. For the State : Mr.Ravi Verma,Adv. ----------- 2 4. 10/11/2010 The dispute in both the cases is with regard to right of rival parties to act as Incharge Headmaster of the School. By the impugned Annexure-1 in the first case (Annexure-4 in the second case) dated 16.7.2009, respondent no.5 in the first case and petitioner in the second case was authorized to perform the duties of Incharge Headmaster. Grievance of the petitioner in the first case is that the outgoing Headmaster had handed over the charge to him and since then he is acting as Incharge Headmaster. Subsequently, a report was submitted by the Managing Committee in favour of the petitioner which was approved by the higher authorities. Challenge by the petitioner of the first case to Annexure-1 is on the ground that respondent no.5 is not qualified to become a regular Headmaster and therefore, he cannot be authorized also to act as Incharge Headmaster. Learned counsel for respondent no.5, on the other hand, has challenged the eligibility of the petitioner to act as Incharge Headmaster. The rival claim and challenge in respect 3 of each other is only in respect of right to act as Incharge Headmaster. Annexure-1 shows that the arrangement authorizing respondent no.5 to act as Incharge Headmaster was subject to posting of regular Headmaster in the School. In the circumstances, in the interest of the Institution, this Court thinks it appropriate that a regular Headmaster should be posted in the School as soon as possible. Respondents are accordingly directed to make arrangement and post/appoint a regular Headmaster in the School within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. For one month, status quo as of today shall be maintained. With the above observations and directions, both the writ applications are disposed of. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)