IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.60 of 2009 SUJIT KUMAR SUMAN, S/o Sri Prahlad Rai, Resident of village West Balua, P.O. Kans Diar, P.S. Doriganj, District Chapra (Saran). . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Home Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 6. The Deputy Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 7. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saran, Chapra. 8. The Collector, District Saran, Chapra. 9. The District Education Officer, Saran, Chapra. 10. The District Superintendent of Education, Saran, Chapra. 11. The Superintendent of Police, Saran, Chapra. 12. The Officer-in-charge, Doriganj police station, District Saran, Chapra. 13. The Block Development Officer, Sadar, Saran, Chapra. . . . . Respondents. 14. Heman Rai the then Mukhiya Musepur Panchayat, P.S. Doriganj, District Saran, Chapra. 15. Prithvi Nath Yadav, the then Secretary of Musepur Panchayat, P.S. Doriganj, District Saran, Chapra. 16. Santosh Kumar son of Sri Sri Amar Rai, Musepur Panchayat, P.S. Doriganj, District Saran, Chapra. 17. Anandi Prasad son of Sri Ghodhee Rai, Musepur Panchayat, P.S. Doriganj, District Saran, Chapra. 18. Munni Kumari, daughter of Sri Rama Shankar Shah, Musepur Panchayat, P.S. Doriganj, District Saran, Chapra. 19. The Secretary, School Examination Board, Patna. . . . . . Respondents. ----------- 8/ 08.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. In the instant writ application, the petitioner has prayed for institution of First Information Report against the accused persons, who have got appointment of Panchayat Teachers on the basis of forged documents and certificates. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Santosh Kumar Rai, Anandi Prasad and Munni Kumari have 2 secured appointments as Panchayat Teachers on the basis of forged and fabricated mark sheets. A counter affidavit has been filed by Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. In paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit, it has been stated that the mark sheet of Santosh Kumar Rai, who appeared in the Intermediate Examination, 2006 from RaM Jaipal Singh College, Chapra, Saran bearing Roll Code 4103, No. 30014 bearing enlistment no. R-4103 -0471/04 securing 393 marks, is correct. It is further stated in paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Board that the mark sheet submitted by Anandi Prasad was also genuine. However, in respect of Munni Kumari, it was found that the mark sheet was forged. The State counsel submits that on the basis of the aforesaid mark sheets appointment was made on the post of Panchayat Teachers. Learned counsel for the private respondents submits that it is the petitioner, who has made interpolation in the mark sheet of Munni Kumari. He further submits that petitioner has suppressed the fact that he had moved this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 17457 of 2008 for quashing of selection panel, as private respondent nos. 9 and 10 secured appointment on the basis of forged and fabricated documents of educational qualification. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the two reliefs are different. I am unable to agree with the submissions of the 3 learned counsel for the petitioner. The relief prayed for in the earlier writ application would have relevance in the instant case, as in both the cases, the allegation is of securing appointment on forged and fabricated documents. In this view of the matter, this Court does not want to proceed further with this writ application and the same is dismissed. The dismissal of the writ application would not come in the way of the Appellate Tribunal to look into the matter whether appointments in issue has been secured on the basis of fabricated mark sheet. However, it will be open for the concerned respondents, whose marks sheets have been genuine to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)