IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2816 of 2011 DINESH SINGH . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2. 25.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner for the State and for the intervenor. The petitioner is stated to be the elected Mukhiya of Mohanpur Gram Panchayat, Block- Goradih, P.S.-Bhagalpur. He is aggrieved by his removal from the post by the Secretary, Panchayati Raj under Section 18(5) of the Bihar Gram Panchayat Act, 2006 by an order dated 19.1.2011. The Court does not consider it necessary at this stage to examine the order on merits as the writ application can be disposed off on another ground for reasons discussed hereinafter. The allegations relate to irregularities during counseling for appointment of Panchayat Teachers in the year 2008. The petitioner specifically alleges that the Panchayat Secretary who was a member of the committee along with the petitioner and another during the selection process was also subjected to an enquiry and a report was submitted vide Annexure-10 by the Senior Deputy Collector- cum- Enquiry Officer on 29.9.2010 absolving him of 2 the allegations. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore at this stage primarily the issue of discrimination invoking Article 14 of the Constitution of India on the same facts, reserving the right to raise other issues on the impugned order at a subsequent stage, if necessary. Shri Parth Sarthi appearing on behalf of the State submits that he has received written instructions that the enquiry report submitted by the Senior Deputy Collector was examined by the District Magistrate who did not find it acceptable and has ordered fresh enquiry. At this stage, to interfere with the impugned order on merits may not be very fair either to the Panchayat Secretary or to the respondents when issues are still pending consideration. It may create an anomalous position if an order were to be passed in the writ petition today and another order was to be passed with regard to the Panchayat Secretary by the respondents on the same facts. In the peculiar facts of the case, the Court considers it proper to simply set aside the order dated 19.1.2011 at this stage but without prejudice to the rights of the respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law after a final decision is taken 3 with regard to the Panchayat Secretary, if circumstances so warrant. In that event the respondents shall be obliged to make available to the petitioner the fresh materials which may surface in context of the Panchayat Secretary but which may be relevant to the case of the petitioner also. The order dated 19.1.2011 is set aside. The writ application is conditionally allowed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)