JUDGMENT D.P. Wadhwa, C.J. & S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. The appellants have challenged the order passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.10417 of 1993 by which the prayer of the appellants for their absorption in Government service and prayer for payment of salary for he period from October, 1977 onwards has been rejected. 2. The appellants were serving in a school known as ‘Sitaram Middle School’ which was under a Private Management. According to the counsel for appellants, the school in question stood taken over with effect from 19th of February, 1977, when a letter was issued by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Patna Division, Patna. According to the counsel for the appellants in terms with the decision given by one learned Single Judge in Nandkeshwar Singh and others Vs. The State of Bihar and others (1985 P.L.J.R. 608), and in terms with Section 3 (2) of the Bihar Non Government Elementary Schools (Taking over of Control) Act, 1976, the school in question automatically stood taken over with effect form the date the feasibility to take over report was submitted by the District Committee. Further according to the appellants no separate notification of take over is required to be published by the State in pursuance of the aforesaid Section 3(2) of the Take Over Act, 1976. 3. The learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment passed in CWJC. No 10417 of 1993 (disposed of on 13th January, 1995) has disagreed with the finding given by another learned Single Judge in Nandkeshwar Singh and others (1985 P.L.J.R. 608) and relying on a decision of the Supreme Court in State of Bihar and others V. Chandradip Rai and other (A.I.R. 1981, 2071) held that a specific notification is to be issued by the State of Bihar for the purpose of take over of a school in terms with Section 3(2) of the Take Over Act, 1976, as is required under Section 3(3) of the said Take Over Act, 1976. 4. Section 3 of Bihar Non Government Elementary Schools (Taking over of Control) Act, 1976 is quoted hereunder’ “…..3. 4. Section 3 of Bihar Non Government Elementary Schools (Taking over of Control) Act, 1976 is quoted hereunder’ “…..3. Taking over of Non Government Elementary schools by State Government : (1) Elementary schools managed by the District Board, Zila Parishad, the Municipal Board and the Patna Municipal Corporation, and those opened under the Expansion and Improvement scheme shall be deemed to have been taken over by the State Government with effect from the 1st day of January, 1971. (2) Aided Elementary Schools, the Managing Committees of which have handed over voluntarily the control of the school of the Government shall be taken over by the State Government with effect from the date which shall be determined by the District Committee referred to in sub section (4) for this purpose. (3) Elementary schools administered by any public or private undertaking shall be taken over by the State Government by publication of a notification in the official gazette with effect from the date to be specified therein. (4) (a) With regard to the taking over of Elementary schools other than these mentioned in sub section (1) and (3) there shall be a District Committee in each District which shall examine the feasibility of taking over of such schools by the State Government and which shall consist of the following members: (1) Deputy Development Commissioner/ Administrator, District Board Chairman. (2) District Superintendent of Education Society. Members (3) District Education Officer, (4) District Inspector of Schools, (5) Sub-divisional Education Officer of the concerned subdivision, and (6) Deputy Inspector of schools concerned. (b) The State Government may, from time to time changes in the personnel of the District Committees so constituted. 5. From the aforesaid provisions of Section 3(2) of the said Act it is evident and clear the there is no automatic take over of a school from the date of determination made by the District Committee under the aforesaid provisions (Section 3(2) of the Take Over Act, 1976). 6. While agreeing with the finding given by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment passed in CWJC. No. 10417 of 1993 we hold that after fixation of effective date of take over made by the District Committee, it the respondent State who is to come out with a notification of take over, which is to be published in a official gazette. No. 10417 of 1993 we hold that after fixation of effective date of take over made by the District Committee, it the respondent State who is to come out with a notification of take over, which is to be published in a official gazette. We further hold that decision given by the learned Single Judge in Nandkeshwar Singh and others V. The State of Bihar and others (1985 PLJR. 608) does not lay down the correct proposition of law. In present case apart from the aforesaid fact it will be evident that the learned Single Judge has held that the claim of the appellants is state. We find no reason to differ with the finding of the learned Single Judge. The letters patent appeal is dismissed.