IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6695 of 2007 Awadhesh Prasad, son of Sri Raghuvir Das, resident of Village- Kharsaria, P.S. Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda, at present residing At Village- Khajura, P.S. Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda. ----Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Secretary, Human Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. 4. District Magistrate, Nalanda at Bihar Shariff. 5. District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda at Biharsharif. 6. Block Development Officer, Nagarnausa, District-Nalanda. 7. Block Education Extension Officer, Nagarnausa, District-Nalanda. 8. Mukhiya, Khajura Gram Panchyat, P.S. Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda. ----Respodents. ----------- 2. 28.02.2009. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and for the State. Petitioner in response to an advertisement No. 1079 dated 28.06.2002, submitted his application for being appointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in Khajura Gram Panchayat. Considering his educational qualification and other things, he was selected for being appointed as Shiksha Mitra alongwith seven other persons. He was sent for training at High School, Nagarnausa on 12.07.2003. On completion of training, he was posted in Shakarpura Primary School. He completed 11 months contractual period as Panchayat Siksha Mitra and was allowed two extensions on 17.8.2004 and 15.8.2005 for 11 months on each occasion. When petitioner was still continuing on the post of Panchayat Shikha Mitra, Bihar Panchyat Primary Teachers (Appointment and Service Condition)Rules,2006 came into force. As provided under Rule 20(ii)(iii) of 2006 rules Panchayat Shiksha Mitra working on 01.07.2006 were absorbed as Panchayat Teachers. - 2 - Petitioner was also absorbed as Panchayat Teacher under the provision of Rule 20(ii)(iii) of 2006 Rules. Subsequently some complaints were filed regarding petitioner’s appointment as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in the year 2003, 2004 and 2005. No such objections had been filed at the relevant time when the petitioner was appointed for the first time as Shiksha Mitra and allowed extensions on two occasions. Government’s guideline relating to appointment of Panchyat Shiksha Mitra provided 30 days time for filing any objection relating to appointment of Siksha Mitra in case there is any complaint. The District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda at Biharsharif, Block Development Officer, Nagarnausa, Nalanda, Block Education Extension Officer, Nagarnausa, Nalanda and Mukhiya, Khajura Gram Panchayat, Nagarnausa, Nalanda, entertained complaint filed at belated stage in the year 2007 and conducted ex- parte enquiry in violation of rule of natural justice. Enquiry was conducted without giving any notice to the petitioner. In violation of Rule 20(ii) (iii) as well as in violation of Rule of natural justice, the impugned order contained in Memo No.374 dated 25.01.2007 was passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda terminating the services of the petitioner. In consequence to the order passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda, the Mukhiya, Khajura Gram Panchayat issued an order contained in letter no.1 dated 11.10.2006, terminating service of petitioner and all other candidates who were earlier appointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra and subsequently absorbed as Panchayat Teachers. - 3 - Prayer of the petitioner is for quashing the orders contained in memo No.374 dated 25.1.2007 issued under the signature of District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda, order contained in letter no. 3674 dated 25.3.2006 issued by the District Magistrate, Nalanda, order no.1017 dated 6.10.2007 of Block Development Officer, Nagarnausa as well as order contained in letter no.1 dated 11.10.2006 issued by the Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj Khajura. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda respondent no.5 it has been stated that services of the petitioner and others were terminated in the light of Departmental letter no.1899 dated 10.11.2006. This letter clearly indicates that after 01.07.2006 there can not be any appointment on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra but the appointments made earlier can be cancelled. Counter affidavit is completely sient whether under 2006 rule there is any provision for reviewing any appointment made previously and subsequently absorbed under rule 20(ii)(iii) of rule 2006. I find that under 2006 rules the District Superintendent of Education, District Magistrate of the concerned district and Block Education Extension Officer are not authorised either to receive any complaint, entertain any objection or hold any enquiry as well as pass order terminating service of the Siksha Mitra, whose service has been absorbed under rule 20(ii)(iii) of 2006 rules. Considering all these facts the impugned order annexures contained in memo No.374 dated 25.1.2007 issued by the District - 4 - Superintendent of Education,, Nalanda, letter no.3674 dated 25.3.2006 issued by the District Magistrate, Nalanda, order contained in Memo No.1017 dated 6.10.2007 issued by the Block Development Officer, Nagarnausa and letter no.1 dated 11.10.2006 issued by the Mukhiya of the concerned Gram Panchayat are quashed. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner immediately without any delay with all consequential benefits. The order must be complied with without any delay. This application is allowed. U.K. (Mridula Mishra,J)