IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10916 of 2008 Md.Abul Kalam Azad son of Md. Fida Hussain, resident of village-Hanuman Nagar, post- Haripur, Block+P.S.-Raghopur, District- Supaul. ………………………Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Regional Director of Education, Koshi Commissionaire, Saharsa. 5. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Koshi Commissionaire, Saharsa. 6. The District Magistrate, Supaul, District- Supaul. 7. The District Superintendent of Education, Supaul, District-Supaul. 8. The Sub-Divisional Education Officer, Birpur, District-Supaul. 9. The Block Development Officer, Raghopur-Block, District-Supaul. 10. The Block Education Extension Officer, Raghopur-Block, District-Supaul. 11. The Gram Panchayat Haripur through its Mukhiya within, Block-Raghopur, District-Supaul. 12. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Haripur within Block-Rahopur,District-Supaul. 13. The Secretary Panchayat Teacher Selection Committee, Gram Panchayat Haripur within Block- Raghopur, District-Supaul. 14. The Headmaster, Lakhichand, Sahu High School, Simarahi Bazar, District-Supaul. 15. The Assistant Teacher, Harawat Raj High School, Ganopatganj, District-Supaul. 16.The Panchayat Urdu Teacher, at Primary School Urdu at Hanuman Nagar, Gram Panchayat Haripur under Block-Raghopur, District-supaul. ………………Respondents. ----------- 2 20.09.2011 Petitioner has challenged an order of the B.D.O. dated 12.04.2008, as contained in Annexure-18 with the writ application, which was passed on the complaint filed by 2 the petitioner in respect of appointment of one Jamil Akhtar as Panchayat Teacher. The complaint of the petitioner which was considered by the B.D.O. is at page 68 of the brief. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had raised a claim that upon resignation of one Bibi Saiyera Bano he should have been appointed from the merit list. However, the said Jamil Akhtar was appointed who had produced fake certificates. The B.D.O. in his order has considered the said allegation of the petitioner with regard to fake certificates produced by the said Jamil Akhtar and has wrongly found no merits in the allegation. He also submits that the report submitted to the B.D.O. by the Headmaster of the School was a manipulated report and the correct facts were not placed before the B.D.O. Referring to certain other documents placed on record with the writ application, he submits that, in fact, allegation of the petitioner was correct and the said Jamil Akhtar had produced certificates of two Institutions of the same session claiming that he had 3 attended both of them. The factual aspects of the matter cannot be decided in a writ jurisdiction as the same are disputed questions of fact and requires verification from the records of the respective schools. In the circumstances, if the petitioner is advised, he may file an appeal before the Appellate Authority with a prayer to re-consider the matter afresh after getting the original records from the respective schools and the records from the concerned Panchayat in respect of the appointment of the said Jamil Akhtar. If petitioner files such an appeal, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same on merits after calling for the original records and shall come to an independent decision without feeling any impediment from the order of the B.D.O. passed earlier. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Arvind/ ( J.N. Singh, J.)