IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18808 of 2011 Ahsanul Bari S/O Md. Idris Resident Of Village - Ragdehra, P.S.- Jokihat, Distirct - Araria Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Its Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department Government Of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 2. The Director (Primary Education), Human Resources Development Department, Government Of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 3. The District Magistrate, Araria 4. The District Education Officer, Araria 5. The District Programme Officer (P.E.), Araria 6. The Member, District - Teacher Appointment Appellate Authority, Araria 7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Jokihat, District - Araria 8. The Block Development Officer, Jokihat, District - Araria 9. The Mukhia Gram Panchayat Raj, Bagdahre, P.S.- Jokihat, District - Araria 10. The Panchayat Secretary Gram Panchayat Raj-Bagdahra, P.S.- Jokihat, District - Araria ---------------------------------- 2. 25.10.2011 Heard Mr. Uday Bhanu Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.C. to S.C.-23 for the respondents No. 1 to 5, 7, and 8. The petitioner has filed this writ application to quash the order dated 02.08.2011 contained in Memo No. 152 passed by the Member, District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Araria in case No. 10/09 by which the appointment of the petitioner made in the year 2005 has been set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Md. Sarfaraz Alam, being aggrieved by such appointment 2 had moved before this Court and the matter was sent to the Appellate Authority and the present impugned order came to be passed. From the order impugned, he points out that the said Md. Sarfaraz Alam withdrew his claim as he was appointed as Mukhiya and in that view of the matter he submits that the Appellate Authority ought not to have proceeded in the matter and the case should have been disposed off without going into merits. He further points out that the petitioner was No. 2 in the merit list and in that view of the matter also, since no irregularity or illegality is alleged against him on the basis of his having the requisite qualification for the post, it was improper for the Appellate Authority to have passed such an order. He submits that on 11.05.2005, he was appointed as Panchayat Siksha Mitra and later on in view of the new Rules was confirmed as Panchayat Shikshak with effect from 01.07.2006 and since then he is continuing. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand has referred to the order impugned and said that there was huge bungling in such appointment and as such the said order did not need any interference. 3 Considering the rival considerations, this Court feels inclined to accept the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Once the complainant expressed his desire not to pursue the matter before the Appellate Authority, it should not have gone ahead to pass any order on merit. In any view of the matter, the petitioner, as per the facts emanating from the order and from the records, was at No. 2 position and there was no other illegality or irregularity alleged with regard to the procedure adopted or the qualification and eligibility possessed by the petitioner to hold such a post. In view of the aforesaid, the order dated 02.08.2011 contained in Memo No. 152 passed by the Member, District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Araria in Case No. 10 of 2009 is set aside. The writ petition stands allowed. The petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits including his continuance in service. Saif/- (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)