IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6805 of 2008 Prem Prakash, son of Sri Vidya Bhushan Pandey, resident of village Lakhawar, P.O. Lakhawar, P.S. Ghoshi, District- Jehanabad. ………… Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar through its Secretary, Human Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 2.The Collector, Jehanabad 3.The Deputy Development Commissioner, Jehanabad 4.The District Education Officer, Jehanabad 5.The Mukhiya, Lakhawar Gram Panchayat, Ghoshi, Jehanabad 6.The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Lakhawar, Ghoshi, Jehanabad. ………… Respondents ----------- 3. 28/07/2011 This Court had disposed of earlier writ application of the petitioner directing for a fresh enquiry to be held and also directing the District Magistrate to dispose of the representation of the petitioner thereafter. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the District Superintendent of Education was accordingly directed to hold enquiry by the office of the District Magistrate, which was held and the District Superintendent of Education submitted his report dated 12.9.2007, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-7. He submits that in the enquiry the District Superintendent of Education had found that the appointment of the petitioner could be treated as against 2 general vacancy. However, he submits that the District Magistrate, without looking to this report and only relying upon the earlier report of the Deputy Development Commissioner, which was under challenge in the writ application, has passed impugned order, as contained in Annexure-6, holding the appointment of the petitioner as illegal. Though a stand has been taken in the counter affidavit that the District Magistrate had perused all the records before passing the impugned order (Annexure-6), learned counsel for the respondents fails to show from Annexure-6 that Annexure-7 was considered by the District Magistrate before passing the impugned order. Clearly, the order of the District Magistrate suffers from non-application of mind to the relevant materials. In normal course, this Court would have remitted the matter back to the District Magistrate for fresh orders after considering the report of the District Superintendent of Education, as contained in Annexure-7. However, after constitution of the statutory Appellate Authority under the Rules, all 3 Government Officials have been divested of the powers to pass orders in respect of validity or otherwise of appointment of Panchayat Teachers and/or their termination. In the circumstances, the order of the District Magistrate, as contained in Annexure-6, is quashed and he is directed to transmit all the records connected with the matter to the concerned Appellate Authority within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of the records, the Appellate Authority shall issue notice to the concerned parties, shall call for the original records, if necessary, and shall decide the matter positively within three months from the date of receipt of the records. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)