IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18273 of 2009 1. SHANU PRIYA D/O SRI BACHI PRASAD SINGH R/O VILL- SHISHIYA, P.S. BARARI, DISTT. KATIHAR 2. MADHU PRIYA D/O SRI BACHI PRASAD SINGH R/O VILL- SHISHIYA, P.S. BARARI, DISTT. KATIHAR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE COMMISSIONER PURNIA DIVISION, PURNIA 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KATIHAR 5. THE MUKHIYA GRAM PANCHAYAT SHISHIYA, P.S. BARARI, KATIHAR 6. THE D.S.E. KATIHAR 7. THE SECRETARY GRAM PANCHAYAT SHISHIYA, P.S. BARARI, DISTT. KATIHAR ----------- 02/ 22.04.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel appearing for the State. Petitioner has filed this application for a direction to the Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchayat Raj, Shishiya to issue appointment letter in favour of the petitioners in compliance of the direction dated 24.6.2009 passed by District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Katihar in Appeal Case No. 326 of 2009. Petitioners’ case is that though their names were in the merit list and they were entitled for their appointment in the unreserved female category but the Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary did not consider their names for appointment and persons outside of the panel - 2 - were appointed. The appointment had been made in the year, 2006 and for the first time in 2009 the appeal was preferred by the petitioners. The Appellate Tribunal decided the appeal preferred by the petitioners in absence of all concerned respondents including the persons, who were appointed on the post of teacher. Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of District Superintendent of Education, Katihar as well as Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchayat Raj, Shishiya. Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary in the counter affidavit have stated that the petitioners have filed their belated appeal after three years of the completion of the process of appointment. The appeal was heard ex-parte and order was passed. The Mukhiya, Panchayat Secretary and other necessary respondents neither noticed nor given opportunity of being heard. It has also been stated that the order has been passed by the Appellate Tribunal without looking into the connected records of the appointment. So far appointment is concerned, it was legally made by the Committee constituted for the appointment. The respondents have not committed any error as they are not - 3 - responsible for petitioners’ appointment. Considering the fact that an ex-parte order was passed and the necessary parties neither impleaded as respondents nor noticed, the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal cannot be held to be a legal order. Accordingly, the order dated 24.6.2009 passed by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Katihar in Appeal Case No. 326 of 2009 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Katihar. The counsels for the petitioners as well as respondents are directed to communicate/produce this order before the Tribunal within four weeks from today. The Tribunal is directed to issue notice to all necessary parties including the Mukhiya, Panchayat Secretary and persons earlier appointed on the post. Notices will be issued to all respondents and only after receiving the service report, the appellate authority will adjudicate the matter and will pass order in accordance with law. Before passing the order, the tribunal will also call for the relevant documents/records connected with the appointment. In case the matter will be decided in favour of the appellants - 4 - the Panchayat Secretary and Mukhiya will implement the order passed by the tribunal. This application is disposed of. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)