IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17892 of 2008 SAVITA KUMARI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- CWJC No.17957 of 2008 AJAY KUMAR RAM Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- CWJC No.18298 of 2008 MD.NASIR ALI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 8.9.2009. Petitioners in all these writ applications have challenged the order dated 23.10.2008 contained in Memo no.1356 issued by the Block Development Officer, Dariapur, Chapra whereby their services have been held illegal and they have been terminated from the post of Panchayat Teacher. Petitioners case is that they were appointed as Panchayat teachers and appointment letters were issued in their favour on 22.3.2007 and they were continuing on their posts. Considering that for making payment of their salary even a cheque was issued by the department. On account of issuance of cheque, before making payment of salary to the petitioners, the Mukhia of the concerned Gram Panchayat as well as the Panchayat Secretary were asking something and refused to sign the cheque, as such they in connivance with the B.D.O. had got issued the impugned order. The grounds which have been taken for terminating the services of the petitioners are non existent. In case of Savita Kumari and Ajay Kumar Ram the ground taken is that they were appointed considering their percentage 2 of marks including vocational as well as additional subject. In case of Md. Nasir Ali the ground taken is that after closure of selection process, his name was subsequently added. In support of their contention the petitioners have brought on record, the enquiry report submitted by the Block Education Extension Officer dated 9.5.2009 contained in letter no.73. This report shows that the ground taken for cancellation of petitioners appointment was completely illegal and non existence. Name of Nasir Ali has been found in the register at Sl.no.358 and the register was closed at Sl.no.360 and signed by the competent authority, there is no reason for interpolation in the register. So far Savita Kumari and Ajay Kumar Ram are concerned, counsel for the petitioners has drawn my attention towards their mark sheet. On perusal of the marksheet I found that they were appointed considering their marks minus additional subject and deducting 30 marks from the vocational subject. I do not find that there was any error. I also found that the Block Development Officer, Dariapur, Chapra has passed the order of termination in the month of October, 2008, when 2008 Rule has come into force, according to which the jurisdiction was taken away from the B.D.O. and vested in Appellate Tribunal. Considering that grounds taken for termination were non-existent, the order contained in Memo no.1356 dated 23.10.2008, issued by the B.D.O. Dariapur, Chapra is illegal. The order is not sustainable also because it has been passed, behind the back of the petitioners without holding any enquiry. These three writ applications are allowed. Petitioners are directed to be reinstated on their posts. 3 They are also entitled for all consequential benefits from which they have been deprived on account of issuance of impugned order. Payment of salary should also be paid to the petitioners without any delay, preferably within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Sss/- (Mridula Mishra, J)