IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.19659 of 2010 SATESHWAR PRASAD, son of Late Rameshwar Prasad, Resident of village and P.O. Masti Chak, P.S. Dariyapur, District- Saran at Chapra, presently working as an Assistant Teacher in Government Basic School, Masti Chak, District- Saran at Chapra. . . . . . 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 Special Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saran Division, Chapra. 6. The District Superintendent of Education, Saran at Chapra –cum-Enquiry Officer. . . . . . Respondents. For the Petitioner : Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, AC to G.P.I. ----------- 2/ 07.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. In the instant writ application, the petitioner prays for quashing the order dated 06.11.2010 passed by respondent no.5, Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saran Division, Chapra, whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from the service of Assistant Teacher of Government High School, Masti Chak, Saran on the ground that he was illegally appointed by the then Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saran Division, Chapra in the year, 1991. The petitioner submits that pursuant to Advertisement in the year 1988, he submitted his application to Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saran Division, Chapra through Employment Exchange. The petitioner fulfilled the eligibility criteria for being appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Basic School. He further submits that on the basis of recommendation of interview board, a panel of 900 Matric Trained candidates was 2 prepared by Divisional Education Establishment Committee, which was forwarded to respondent no.4 for its approval under the Appointment Rules of the Department. The respondent no.4 vide letter dated 11.12.1990 approved the panel of serial nos. 1 to 150 for the purposes of appointment and it was further observed therein that if the sufficient number of candidates were not available for appointment from serial nos. 1 to 150 of the panel, then the entire panel is approved. The case of the petitioner is that he was duly appointed in the year 1991 and thereafter he served the institution as Assistant Teacher for about 20 years without any blemish. The petitioner submits that as he was appointed on a substantive post in a regular manner, his services could not be terminated without initiating departmental proceeding. He further submits that letter of respondent no.5 shows that the departmental proceeding has been initiated but charge-sheet has not been submitted against him. He submits that even a copy of the alleged enquiry report was not served upon him neither he was given an opportunity to meet the findings incorporated in the said enquiry report before the disciplinary authority. Learned counsel submits that some similarly situated Assistant Teachers, whose names also did not figure among serial nos. 1 to 150 of the approved list, were also terminated. Some of the teachers moved this Court against the impugned order of termination, wherein facts and issues were similar. He further submits that this Court by order dated 3 26.11.2010 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 19306 of 2010 (Ramayan Chaudhary Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors) as well as in C.W.J.C. No. 19350 of 2010 quashed the order of termination with liberty to respondent to proceed afresh in the departmental proceeding in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner was appointed ignoring the claim of persons, who were senior to him in the panel. After hearing the parties, this Court finds that the issues involved in this writ application is similar to that of the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 19306 of 2010 (Ramayan Chaudhary Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors) as well as in C.W.J.C. No. 19350 of 2010. It appears from the pleading of the petitioner that no charge- sheet or enquiry report was served upon him for his response. In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 06.11.2010 passed by respondent no. 5, Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saran Division, Chapra is here by set aside. The petitioner would be reinstated in service with liberty to the respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observation, this application is disposed of. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)