IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10484 of 2021 ======================================================

Jai Prakash Yadav Son of Late Badri Yadav Resident of Village- Kiratpur, P.S.- Ghoghardiha, District- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Office of the Lokayukta, Bihar through the Secretary, 4 Kautilya Marg, Bailey Road, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate, Madhubani.

5. The District Education Officer, Madhubani.

6. The District Programme Officer, (Establishment), Madhubani.

7. The Block Development Officer, Ghoghardiha, Madhubani.

8. The Block Education Officer, Ghoghardiha, Madhubani.

9. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Kewatna, P.S.- Ghoghardiha, District- Madhubani.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kripa Nand Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, AC to GP-20 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 29-04-2025 Heard Mr. Kripa Nand Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, learned AC to GP-20 for the State.

2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ petition has sought inter alia following relief(s), which is reproduced hereinafter:

"(i) For issuance of an appropriate direction, order or writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 3 to produce the entire proceeding including the order dated 16.10.2020 passed in Complaint Case No. 5/ललक (शशकक) 80/2010 by Learned Lokayukta, Bihar, Patna and after production of the same, Quash the entire proceeding including order dated 16.10.2020 and the complaint petition as also the consequential letter no. 239 dated 22.12.2020 issued by the District Education Officer, Madhubani by holding that the proceeding aforesaid by the Learned Lokayukta is wholly without jurisdiction and in complete contravention of Sub Section (5) of Section 29 of the Bihar Lokayukta Act, 2011.

(ii) For holding and declaring the entire proceeding / enquiry initiated against the petitioner on the basis of a complaint by third party, other than the aggrieved, the Learned Lokayukta, Bihar is not vested with the jurisdiction to enquire the issue under Section 2(f) of the Bihar Lokayukta Act, 2011 and ought to have been closed the complaint.

(iii) For any other relief/reliefs to which the petitioner may be found entitled to, in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed as a Shiksha Mitra vide Memo No. 29 dated 02.06.2005 and his selection was extended for a period of eleven months in the year 2006. Thereafter, the State Government came out with Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher (Employment and Service Condition) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules, 2006") and by a policy decision, post of Shiksha Mitra was abolished and the petitioner had become Niyojit Teacher as per the terms and conditions contained in Rules, 2006. A complaint was made before the Lokayukta in the year 2013 by one Deo Karan Rai in respect of appointment of the petitioner and other Shiksha Mitra, which was registered and Lokayukta directed the Collector to lodge an FIR against the then Mukhiya, Panchayat Secretary and the petitioner for committing forgery in selection of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. The Block Development Officer, Ghoghardiha lodged an FIR bearing Ghoghardiha P.S. Case No. 125 of 2016 under Section 403, 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code in which, final form was submitted on 02.08.2017 and no cognizance, as on date, has been taken against the petitioner in respect of the said criminal case. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is still working as per the provision of R