IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3295 of 2011 NARESH KUMAR S/O LATE JAG MOHAN PRASAD, R/O VILL- +PO- DIGHORA PS- TIKARI, DISTT- GAYA,PRESENTLY R/O MOHALLA- GAUTAM NAGAR, WEST OF CHANDAUTI BLOCK, PS- CHANDAUTI DISTT- GAYA--PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CHIEF SECY. BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECY. HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT, BIHAR, PATNA 3. DISTRICT ADULT EDUCATION OFFICER, GAYA 4. DIRECTOR, ADULT EDUCATION-CUM-ADDL. SECY,BIHAR, PATNA 5. ADULT & NON-FORMAL EDUCATION PROJECT OFFICER, TEKARI CUM BELAGANJ, TEKARI, GAYA 6. DIRECTOR, ADULT EDUCATION, BIHAR, PATNA--RESPONDENTS ----------- 2 7.7.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. There has been a long battle with regard to such persons who were engaged by the State of Bihar in the Non- Formal Education Project. Many of them were retrenched but they were extended protection by the High Court in several decisions which came to be passed from time to time. On 12th January 2010 the Department of Human Resources, Government of Bihar under the signature of Principal Secretary in furtherance of the decision of the High Court has laid down certain guidelines as to how those persons are to be accommodated or adjusted. Such guideline is annexure-8 to the writ application. Petitioner is supposed to have worked as a supervisor in the Non-Formal Education Project Tekari between 10.6.1991 to 12.1.2.1994. Since he had completed more than three years then his case comes within the ambit of the circular or guidelines contained in annexure-8 for being accommodated under the State. - 2 - During the course of argument petitioner produces certain documents though not on record to show that his name finds mention on a kind of chart or discussions which have been made by the District Jan Shiksha Padadhikari, Gaya. Since the matter is being delayed the petitioner has approached the High Court on this issue. The parameters decided by the State are already available to all the authorities who are saddled with the responsibility of implementation of the direction of the High Court specially annexure-8. There is some material to show that the petitioner is also one of those persons who had worked as a supervisor in Non-Formal Education Project. If that be so then the concerned respondents specially the District Adult Education Officer, Gaya respondent no.3 will take a decision on the status of the petitioner and do the needful along with other cases or claims, within a reasonable time frame as many a persons like the petitioner have been on the road from a long time, whatever be the reason behind such a decision. This writ application is disposed of with the above direction/observation. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)