IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2671 of 2009 Seema Singh @ Seema Singh Shimmi, w/o Dhirendra Singh, resident of village – Khoripakar Khong, P.O. + P.S. – Amnour, District - Saran ……………. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Secretary, Primary, Secondary cum Adult Education, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. The Director, Sarb Shiksha Abhiyan, Bihar, Patna 5. The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, Sarb Shiksha Abhiyan, Saran at Chapra 6. The District Superintendent of Education cum District Programme Coordinator, Saran at Chapra. …………….. Respondents ---------------------------------- with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7748 of 2009 Archana Kumari, w/o Shir Prabhat Kumar, resident of Katahari Bagh, Arya Nagar, P.O. – Chapra, P.S. – Chapra Town, District – Saran, Pin – 841304. ………………… Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Secretary, Primary, Secondary cum Adult Education, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. The Director, Sarb Shiksha Abhiyan, Bihar, Patna 5. The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, Sarb Shiksha Abhiyan, Saran at Chapra 6. The District Superintendent of Education cum District Programme Coordinator, Saran at Chapra. …………….. Respondents ---------------------------------- 12. 18.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the Respondents. This matter was adjourned on several occasions, so that counsel, appearing for the State, may bring relevant Orders on record of the case to justify the stand taken in the counter affidavit, regarding cancellation of entire selection process, initiated for appointment of Warden-cum-Teacher, Part-Time / Full- 2 Time Teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Saran. Since, no such documents have been brought on record to justify the stand taken by the State, this matter is finally being taken up for disposal. Prayer of the petitioners in both the Writ Applications is for a direction to the Respondents to accept their joining respectively, as Warden-cum- Teacher (Petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 2671 of 2009) and Part-Time / Full-Time Teacher (Petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 7748 of 2009) in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Saran, which is being done under the Sarb Shiksha Abhiyan, Saran at Chapra. Petitioner’s case is that in response to the advertisement, published in Daily Newspaper “Aaj” on 12.05.2007, they applied for the post of Warden-cum- Teacher and Part-Time / Full-Time Teacher, respectively in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalya, Saran. They appeared in the written examination and declared successful. They also participated in the Interview and were selected for appointment. The names of selected candidates were published on the notice board of the Office. So far petitioners are concerned, their position was 8th (Petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 2671 of 2009) and 6th (Petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 7748 of 2009) in the panel of the selected candidates. They were waiting for issuance of appointment letters and joining on the post, but 3 instead of issuance of appointment letter and accepting their joining, on 09.11.2007, again for the same post, an advertisement was published in the Daily Newspaper “Aaj”. No reason was assigned for publication of advertisement and for initiating second selection process. Petitioners were not sent any information that their selection has been cancelled. However, petitioners, when approached the DSE-cum-District Programme Coordinator, he did not inform regarding cancellation of their selection. Petitioners, being aggrieved, have filed Writ Applications, alleging that the Respondents are acting illegally by not issuing appointment letter and accepting her joining, despite the fact that they have been selected by the Committee. In the counter affidavit, filed on behalf of the Respondent-State, the stand taken by the Respondents is that since the District Magistrate has not approved the reservation roster and some illegality was there in the procedure, followed, their appointment, as such, was cancelled. In support of this contention that entire selection process was cancelled, no order passed by the District Magistrate, was brought on record. Counsel, appearing for the State, was directed to produce connected records before this Court to justify the stand taken by the Respondents. Today, the connected records, which according to the counsel, 4 appearing for the State, contains cancellation order was produced before the Court. After going through entire record, I find that the selection process was completed and the then District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra had approved the selection and also directed the District Superintendent of Education for issuance of appointment letter. The District Magistrate, during whose tenure, entire selection process had been completed, had not recorded any finding that the reservation roster was not approved and without his permission entire selection process had been completed. However, subsequently, the new District Magistrate has taken this stand that reservation roster should have been approved by the District Magistrate and only after his approval the selection process should have been initiated. But for what reason the new District Magistrate was of this opinion that selection process had not been completed in accordance with law, that is not apparent .There is an order of the District Magistrate on record, but that can not be considered as cancellation order, as candidates wee never communicated that order. Rather, the noting of the District Coordinator indicates that without there being any cancellation order of the District Magistrate and without any approval of the District Magistrate for publication of advertisement, fresh steps were taken by the junior authority and fresh advertisement was 5 published. Going through all these matters, I find that the stand taken in the counter affidavit on behalf of the Respondents that reservation roster was not followed and the selection process was faulty, is incorrect, the noting of the then District Magistrate is sufficient to prove that following all legal procedure, selection was made and it was approved by the District Magistrate. He had directed for issuance of appointment letter. Any subsequent act at the instance of Respondents, can not be said to be legal. Any steps, taken by the Respondents, subsequent to the approval given by the then District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra, directing to issue appointment letter, is held to be illegal. The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, Sarb Shiksha Abhiyan, Saran at Chapra and the District Superintendent of Education- cum-District Programme Coordinator, Saran at Chapra, are directed to issue appointment letters in favor of the petitioners and accept their joining on the post of Warden-cum-Teacher and Part-Time / Full-Time Teacher, respectively in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Saran at Chapra within two weeks from the date of production / communication of this Order. Accordingly, both these Writ Applications are allowed. SKM (Mridula Mishra, J.)