IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.8954 OF 2007 MD.KHAIRUL BASAR,S/O MD. AMIRUDDIN, R/O VILLAGE MANIHARI, P.S MANIHARI, DISTRICT KATIHAR. …………………PETITIONER. VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2.THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KATIHAR. 3.THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, KATIHAR. 4.THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER,MANIHARI, DISTRICT KATIHAR. 5.THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MANIHARI, DISTRICT KATIHAR.. 6.BIBI FIROZA BEGUM, DAUGHTER OF MD. IMRAN, R/O VILLAGE KATHOLIA P.S MANIHARI, DISTRICT KATIHAR. ………………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 29.09.2011 Heard counsel for the parties. All said and done when the learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to explain that the respondent no. 6 had obtained much higher marks than the petitioner who had secured 796 marks as against respondent no. 6 securing 909 marks, rest of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner as with regard to illegality in selection and appointment of respondent no. 6 on the post of Prakhand Shikshak has to be only noted for its being rejected. The respondent no.6, having better merit has been appointed and the petitioner therefore cannot successfully 2 assail the same either before this Court or before the District Teachers Appellate Authority. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)