IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.206 of 2009 Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Kumar Choudhary, Son of Lalo Choudhary, resident of village- Sankh, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Begusarai. …… Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Begusarai. 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Begusarai. 5. The Block Development Officer, Begusarai, District- Begusarai. 6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Begusarai, District-Begusarai. 7. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Sankh, Block- Begusarai, District- Begusarai. 8. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Sankh, Block-Begusarai, District- Begusarai. 9. The Head Master, Primary School Mubarakpur, Panchayat- Sankh, Block- Begusarai, District- Begusarai. ...Respondents ----------- 2/ 15.04.2009 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issues raised in the present writ application are covered by a decision of this court in C.W.J.C. No.4878 of 2007 and analogous cases disposed of on 19.7.2008 as also certain other decisions. Counsel for the State submits that if the issue is covered by any decision of this court, the respondents shall, undoubtedly, be required to consider the grievance of the petitioner in that light. But, if the respondents be satisfied of any difference and the judgments relied upon be not applicable to the petitioner, the respondents should be given the liberty to pass appropriate orders. If an issue has been decided by this court, the respondents are naturally required to consider the grievance of - 2 - any petitioner when he submits that his case is covered by a decision of this court. This shall prevent generation of unnecessary litigation costs and the burden of this court and will also facilitate the administration for the respondents also. If the petitioner files a representation along with a copy of this order and also place any other order of this court, which he claim to be with regard to the persons similarly situated as him, this court directs the respondents to examine the claim of the petitioner in the light of the decisions of this court. If they are satisfied that the petitioner is similarly situated, this court expects them to accord similar treatment to the petitioner without requiring him to obtain individual order or to chase the matter in a contempt application. If, however, the respondents are satisfied that the petitioner is not covered by any order of this court and that his case is distinguishable, liberty has to be granted to the respondents to arrive at that conclusion by a reasoned and speaking order but only after giving an opportunity to the petitioner. The writ application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. JA/- (Navin Sinha, J.)