IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16239 of 2009 ====================================================== Mintu Ansari S/O Md. Nijam Ansari R/O Ward No.22, Bhabhua, P.S.Bhabhua, Distt- Kaimur .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate Kaimur At Bhabhua 3. The Sub Divisional Officer Kaimur, Bhabhua 4. The District Superintendent Of Education- Cum- Sub Divisional Education Officer Bhabhua 5. The Block Development Officer Chand,Distt- Kaimur At Bhabhua 6. The Block Education Extension Officer , Chand,Distt- Kaimur At Bhabhua 7. The Mukhiya , Gram Panchayat Bharari Kala, P.S. Chand, Distt- Kaimur 8. The Secretary, Gram Panchayat Bharari Kala P.S.Chand,Distt- Kaimur 9. Md. Sadakat Hussain S/O Late Mubarak Hussain R/Ovill Karzi, P.S. Chainpur, Distt- Kaimur Bhabhua 10. Member, District Appellate Forum, Kaimur (Bhabhua). .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mithilesh Kr.Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Ga8) Mr. Arvind Kumar-2 Mr. Anil Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. MRIDULA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. MRIDULA MISHRA) 07/ 17-10-2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel representing Respondent No. 9 as well as State. The State-respondents have not filed counter affidavit. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 9. The Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary, Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 did not appear even though a specific allegation has been made Patna High Court CWJC No.16239 of 2009 (7) dt.17-10-2011 2 / 5 2 against these two persons that they have committed illegality in order to appointed Respondent No. 9 against the rules. Petitioner’s prayer is for quashing of order dated 24.9.2009 Passed in Appeal No. 63 of 2009 by Member of District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Kaimur and to reinstate the petitioner on the post of Panchayat Teacher. The Appellate Authority has declared appointment of petitioner illegal and directed to appoint Respondent No. 9. Advertisement, inviting applications for appointment as Panchayat Teacher in Bharti Kala Gram Panchayat were invited. Petitioner and others applied for the post. Petitioner had passed Matric and Intermediate with First Division marks and his percentage of marks was 60.3%. Petitioner was called for counselling, he appeared before the selection committee and in the merit list his name figured at serial no. 14. Respondent No. 9 had passed Matric and Intermediate having 38% marks and his date of birth as disclosed in the matriculation certificate is 28.11.1979. Respondent No. 9 just in order to get appointment as Panchayat Teacher obtained a fake certificate of Moulvi and Fokania, in which his percentage of marks was enhanced to 70%. In the Moulvi and Fokania certificates annexed with the application of Respondent No. 9, his date of birth has been shown as 2.5.1987. Patna High Court CWJC No.16239 of 2009 (7) dt.17-10-2011 3 / 5 3 But, subsequently when an objection was raised on account of discrepancy in his date of birth as shown in the Matriculation certificate and the certificate issued by the Bihar State Madarsa Shiksha Board, an interpolation was made. The date of birth in the certificate was changed to 28.11.1979 and similar correction was also made in the application form submitted by Respondent No. 9 for appointment. Petitioner’s case is that Respondent No. 9 had qualification of Mariculation and Intermediate, as such there was no reason for again obtaining Moulvi and Fokania. This fake degree was obtained for enhancement of percentage of marks. Making forgery and interpolation, Respondent No. 9, became eligible for being considered for appointment. Petitioner has also alleged that one Nasrin Parveen daughter of Panchayat teacher of Bharti Kala Gram Panchayat, whose name was at serial no. 51 of the merit list with 50.22% of marks was appointed, and persons having higher percentage of marks were ignored. Several complaints were made before the District Magistrate against the illegality committed in Panchayat Teachers as such he constituted, a committee comprising of Additional Collector, Kaimur, Block Development Officer, Chand and Block Education Extension Officer, Chand. Three Men Committee, Patna High Court CWJC No.16239 of 2009 (7) dt.17-10-2011 4 / 5 4 submitted its report and recommended for cancelling all appointments made earlier and also recommened for re- counselling and issuance of fresh appointment letters. The report submitted by the Three Men Committee was challenged by Respondent No. 9 before the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority by filing Appeal No. 62 of 2009. The Appellate Authority, without considering the report submitted by the Three Men Committee and ignoring the allegation regarding forgery committed by Respondent No. 9 in his certificate of Madarsa Board and concealment of his earlier Matriculation and Intermediate Certificate, passed an order, whereby appointment of Respondent No. 9 was held to be legal. Counsel for the petitioner submits that Respondent No. 9 had committed serious offence by making forgery and interpolation in his Madarsa certificate, but this was completely ignored by the Appellate Authority. In support of his contention the petitioner has annexed the Matriculation and Intermediate certificate of Respondent No. 9 as well as his original Madarsa certificate annexed with the application and subsequent certificate after committing forgery in the date of birth and also making interpolation in his original application. I find that the Appellate Authority has committed Patna High Court CWJC No.16239 of 2009 (7) dt.17-10-2011 5 / 5 5 serious error by not considering these apparent illegalities and affirming the appointment of Respondent No. 9. Despite all illegalities the Appellate Authority ignored a well considered and reasonable report of Three Men Committee. For all these reasons, I find that impugned order passed by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Kaimur in Appeal No. 63 of 20098 is fit to be quashed. Accordingly, it is quashed. Mukhiya, Panchayat Secretary and the District Superintendent of Education, Kaimur are directed to conduct fresh counselling and prepare a selection panel in accordance with law, considering the merit of the candidates. The counselling must be done, issuing notice to all candidates, whose names already there in the merit panel. Following all procedure as provided under the rule, which includes counselling as well as issuance of appointment letter, appointment letter be issued in favour of selected candidates. Entire proceeding must be completed within four weeks from the date of production/communication of this order. This application is allowed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J)