IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12558 of 2010 1. MOHD.KALIMUDDIN S/O MOHD.MAHFUZ ANSARI R/O VILL DAKAITA, P.O.KHAGAHA MIRGANJ, P.S.RANIGANJ, DISTT-PURNEA(BIHAR) (WORKED AS PANCHAYAT TEACHER, PRIMARY SCHOOL (HARIJAN) AT BASAITHI, BLOCK-RANIGANJ, DISTT- ARARIYA) Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR , THROUGH THE SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY-CUM-COMMISSSIONER, PRIMARY EDUCATION BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ARARIA 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION ARARIA 5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION (EXTENSION) OFFICER RANIGANJ, ARARIA 6. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ BASAITHI, P.O.BASAITHI, P.S.RANIGANJ, DISTT- ARARIA 7. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ BASAITHI, P.O.BASAITHI, P.S.RANIGANJ, DISTT-ARARIA 8. THE DISTRICT TEACHERS EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY ARARIYA THROUGH ITS MEMBER, P.O.& P.S.ARARIA, DISTT-ARARIA ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Shashi Nath Jha. For the State : Mr. R K Tiwari, AC to AAG-12. ----- 02. 01.04.2011 By virtue of Annexure-7 appointment of the petitioner on the post of a Panchayat teacher has been declared to be illegal and therefore set aside. The order in question is dated 15.6.2010 and has been passed by the Appellate Authority, Araria. In the present writ application petitioner has raised a grievance that a complaint was made by one Smt. Shashikala with regard to the manner in which appointment came to be made in Basaithi Gram Panchayat of Raniganj 2 Block. During the course of adjudication of such a complaint the appellate authority also came to a conclusion that appointment of the petitioner was illegal because on the roaster point 660 only a woman coming from extremely backward class could be appointed but it is the petitioner who had been appointed. Irrespective of the fact or the finding which has been arrived at by the learned appellate authority, counsel for the petitioner is correct if what he has stated in para 14 is treated to be a truthful statement. There is clear and categorical assertion made in the writ application that the appellate authority has erred by cancelling the appointment of the petitioner without hearing him since no order can be passed against him having civil consequence, without giving opportunity of hearing then it is a good enough ground to interfere with the conclusion reached by the appellate authority. In many a cases of such kind it has come to the notice of this Court with quite regularity that appellate authorities so constituted are passing orders having direct bearing on the interest of persons so appointed but without issuing any notice or giving them opportunity of hearing. May be during the course of hearing and enquiry materials may emerge which points to the illegality committed in such appointments but that by itself does not mean that the 3 appellate authority has freedom to run amuck by cancelling the appointments even without hearing the persons who are likely to be affected by such a decision. The writ application is allowed. The impugned order in so far as it relates to the petitioner shall be treated to be quashed and a direction is issued to the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Araria that if on verification of records it is found that the petitioner had been noticed but he chose not to appear then he shall restore the order in question, if not, he will give opportunity of hearing and pass a fresh order with regard to the issue. The writ application is disposed of with above observation. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Member, District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Araria to do the needful. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)