IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6205 of 2009 AMRENDRA NARAYAN SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS For the Petitioner : M/S Rajendra Prasad Singh, Rajeev Kumar Singh For the State : Mr. R.C.P. Bharti, SC 14 ----------- 2/ 19/05/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner, who was appointed as a Clerk on 15.3.1986 by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Patna Division, Patna and posted at the High School, sheirpur, Maner. It is his case that thereafter he has been given first time bound promotion also on 1.3.1997 and regularly transferred from one place to another by the District Establishment Committee. Nearly 19 years later, the Respondents suddenly woke up to the issue of legality of his appointment. The show cause notice dated 19.9.2005 alleged that the petitioner had been appointed by the Regional Deputy Director of Education while the appointment was required to be made by the District Education Officer heading the Selection Committee. The petitioner replied to the same when his order of termination followed on 21.11.2005 on the aforesaid ground. The petitioner questioned the same in CWJC No. 14963 of 2005, which was disposed off on 2 30.10.2006 to examine his claim in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & ors. V. Uma Devi & ors. (2006(2) PLJR 363 (S.C.). The Respondents have now rejected the claim of the petitioner by an order dated 28.8.2007 at Annexure-1. It states that he does not fall in the category of irregular appointment, since the Regional Deputy Director of Education was not competent to make the appointment and the District Education Officer was alone competent to do so. The appeal preferred by the petitioner as against the same has also been rejected on 9.4.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on an order of this Court dated 30.4.2009 in CWJC No. 4680 of 2001 and analogous cases on the issue of competence of the Regional Deputy Director to make such appointment inter alia by placing reliance on the Bihar Boards Miscellaneous Rules of the powers of the superior authority to exercise the powers of the inferior authority. This Court additionally finds substance in the submission of the petitioner that the appellate order dated 9.4.2008 is non-speaking in nature. It does not consider the grounds of appeal but merely sates that it finds no reason to take a view different from that taken 3 by the Director, Secondary Education as contained in his order dated 28.8.2007. The law stands settled that the appellate order even of affirmation was required to briefly discuss the application of mind as to why the grounds raised in the appeal were not acceptable and a brief recording of reasons why the appellate authority was in agreement with the original order. In absence of that procedure having been followed, the appellate order dated 9.4.2008 is, accordingly, set aside and the matter is remanded to the Appellate Authority to take a fresh decision in accordance with law. While taking such decision the Appellate Authority is required to properly take into consideration the order dated 30.4.2009 in CWJC No. 4680 of 2001. If the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the petitioner is similarly situated, he is required to accord similar treatment to the petitioner. In the event that the Appellate Authority takes a view otherwise, he shall be required to pass a reasoned and speaking order displaying due application of mind by him to the materials on record and penning down his satisfaction by reasoning why the petitioner was not similarly situated as that in CWJC No. 4680 of 2001, so that 4 judicial review, if necessary, of the order of the Appellate Authority shall be facilitated. Let such consideration be done and final orders passed within a maximum period of eight weeks from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. This writ application sands allowed. AKS/ ( Navin Sinha, J.)