IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16684 of 2009 RAMESH SHANKAR, S/O SRI MADAN RAM, R/O VILLAGE-MAIDAN, P.O. AND P.S.-SURSAND, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI, PRESENTLY WORKING AS PANCHAYAT TEACHER IN PRIMARY SCHOOL, RAM BHELAHI, SOUTH TOLA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, MANIKPUR MUSHARNIA, BLOCK-PARIHAR, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. ………………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SITAMARHI, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SITAMARHI, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PARIHAR, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. 7. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, PARIHAR, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. 8. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, MANIKPUR MUSHARNIA, BLOCK-PARIHAR, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. 9. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, MANIKPUR MUSHARNIA, BLOCK-PARIHAR, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. 10.THE HEADMASTER, PRIMARY SCHOOL, RAM BHELAHI, BLOCK-PARIHAR, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. 11. BIRENDRA PASWAN, S/O YOGENDRA PASWAN, R/O VILLAGE AND P.O.-ANDAULI, P.S.-PARIHAR, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. …………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4 15.11.2010 In this writ application the petitioner has challenged an order dated 27.10.2009 passed by the Appellate Authority, as contained in Annexure-9, by which, on the complaint of respondent no.11, the appointment of the petitioners has been cancelled and the respondent no.11 has been directed to be appointed. 2 From the impugned order, it appears that on receipt of the complaint the Block Development Officer had asked the Labour Enforcement Office to enquire and submit his report. The Labour Enforcement Officer submitted the report which showed that certain irregularities had been committed in the selection and preparation of the counselling register. On the basis of the said report, the Appellate Authority came to a conclusion that the counselling had become doubtful. Hence, orders were passed cancelling the appointment of petitioner and for appointment of the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if the counselling was held as illegal and manipulated the entire selection process had to go and fresh counselling had to be held. By no stretch of imagination the Appellate Authority could direct the appointment of the respondent. He further submits that the Appellate Authority has not itself examined the original records and has passed orders only on the basis of the said report of the Labour Enforcement Officer in which allegation was of signature of all the 3 candidates on the counselling register in one pen. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the order shows that the Appellate Authority had looked into the counselling register. Be that as it may, from the order this much is clear that the Appellate Authority has not come to a definite finding with regard to interpolation in the counselling register and has only noticed that allegation was of signature of all the candidates in one pen which makes the counselling doubtful. Whether selection process was held in accordance with law and the records were properly created and maintained is a question of fact which has to be decided on the basis of the examination of the original records with a definite finding. The Appellate Authority, before setting aside the selection of the petitioner by holding the entire selection process bad, was required to come to a definite finding that there was interpolation and manipulation in the records. In that eventuality the only order Appellate Authority could pass was for 4 holding a fresh counselling of the candidates who had applied for the appointment, after applying the cut-off marks and the roster to the list of the candidates. The order impugned is, therefore, quashed and the matter is remitted back to the Appellate Authority to hold a fresh exercise to come to a definite finding and thereafter pass fresh orders in accordance with law. The parties if so advised may appear before the Appellate Authority in the matter to assist. The Appellate Authority shall complete the exercise, as indicated above, and shall pass orders within the time prescribed in the Rules for deciding an appeal. Arvind/ ( J. N. Singh, J.)