JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. 1.Being aggrieved of the order of discontinuance of her contractual appointment as PGT (Physics) from Kendriya Vidyalaya, PO, PS & District- Jamtara by its Principal, respondent No.8 herein, the petitioner moved Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench [Circuit Court at Ranchi] (for short hereinafter to be referred as 'CAT at Ranchi') through the medium of O.A. No. 215 of 2013(R) seeking direction upon respondent No.8 to allow her for resumption of her duties with all arrears of salary, further treating her services to be in continuation from 02.04.2013, the first day of his appointment as PGT (Physics) in the said School. Further direction was sought for issuance of appointment letter and joining report to her. 2. Petitioner had also alleged that respondent No.8 had advanced certain unwarranted remarks towards her and demanded a sum of Rs. 5000/- also from her for allowing her to continue as Teacher in the aforesaid School. 3. Learned CAT at Ranchi did not find substance in any of the submissions of the petitioner and ultimately dismissed the OA vide order dated 24.07.2014, aggrieved thereof, she has knocked the door of this Court through the medium of the instant writ petition which is at its admission stage. 4. Mrs. A.R. Choudhary, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, appears for respondent No.1. Despite service, remaining respondents have not put in appearance. 5. We have heard learned counsel for both the sides and gone through the impugned order of learned CAT at Ranchi minutely. Other documents attached to the instant petition have also been perused by us. 6. On a specific query put to the learned counsel for the petitioner, whether the petitioner had made any complaint with regard to the allegations levelled in OA, he submitted that in this regard representation was moved by the petitioner to Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara, which is available on the paper book of the instant petition. He has drawn our attention to page-33 of the instant petition where the said representation is placed. We have gone through the same. On a further query put to the learned counsel for the petitioner, whether the said complaint/representation was ever inquired into by an authority and the result thereof, he submitted that the said complaint/ representation was duly inquired into but it went against her. We have gone through the same. On a further query put to the learned counsel for the petitioner, whether the said complaint/representation was ever inquired into by an authority and the result thereof, he submitted that the said complaint/ representation was duly inquired into but it went against her. Learned counsel fairly conceded that he should have placed the outcome of the said inquiry conducted in the complaint made by the petitioner. Since he was having the complete report with him in his brief, he has placed it on record in the open Court. Be tagged at its proper place. We have gone through the same, which reveals that the allegations levelled by the petitioner vis-a-vis the demand of Rs.5000/- allegedly made by the Principal of the School, respondent No.8 herein and the remarks advanced by him towards the petitioner in his chambers after calling her. The report reveals that when the petitioner was asked to discontinue as PGT (Physics) in the aforesaid School on 07.04.2013, the Principal of the said School observed as under: - “She is unable to teach properly and most of students were not satisfied from her teaching, therefore, you are informed not to continue in the teaching in this Vidyalaya, because you are unable to complete the purpose of Vidyalaya”. 7. Admittedly, the petitioner remained as contractual teacher only for fifteen days and on account of disinterest shown by her in teaching the students of the School, her services were discontinued. All these aspects have been looked into by the learned CAT at Ranchi in its right perspective and we do not find any reason to have a different view from the one already taken by the learned CAT. 8. Viewed thus, there being no substance in the case of the petitioner on merits, the instant petition deserves to be dismissed. 9. Ordered accordingly. 10. Faced with it, learned counsel for the petitioner states that may be the services of the petitioner have been discontinued as she was on contractual appointment but she may be kept on panel of the teachers atleast. We are afraid if we can pass any order in this regard. The petitioner may make a representation in this regard which will be considered by the concerned authority, if permissible on the strength of the Rules in vogue.