IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5174 of 2009 DOLLY KUMARI MISHRA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 22.4.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This Court does not consider it necessary at this stage to issue notice to private respondent nos. 8 and 9 in view of the nature of order to be passed where their interest are to be equally protected. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 17.3.2009 at Annexure-5 by which the District Magistrate directed the Block Development Officer to cancel the appointment of the petitioner and the consequential order passed by the Block Development Officer dated 25.3.2009 at Annexure-6 referring to the order of the District Magistrate and cancelling the appointment in pursuance thereof. Statement has been made in Paragraph 14 of the writ application that no notice was issued to the petitioner to show cause and neither she was allowed an opportunity to submit her defence in support of the allegations against her before termination of service. Instead of staying the operation of the impugned orders and requiring the official respondents to file counter affidavit and issuance of notice to the private respondents when the writ petition shall come up for admission after years as the Court is today hearing writ petition of the year 2001 the Court proceeds to dispose the application with the following order: Accepting the statement of the petitioner to be correct that - 2 - the order was in violation of the principles of natural justice when both the impugned orders do not reflect issuance of any notice to the petitioner and consideration of his defence, prima facie lending credence to the allegation of the petitioner, this Court considers it appropriate to set aside the impugned order. This shall not result in any benefit to the petitioner of reinstatement. The order is set aside only for that limited purpose. The petitioner shall within two weeks move an application before the appellate authority assailing the impugned orders. The appellate authority shall be required to issue notice to all including the private respondents and then decide the matter afresh in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within the statutory period fixed in the rules creating the authority. If the petitioner does not file an application before the appellate authority within two weeks, the impugned orders shall require no interference and the writ application shall be deemed to have been dismissed. Till such time the appellate authority does not re-hear and determine afresh in accordance with law to prevent creation of third party rights and further complications for that reason, this Court directs that the post from which the petitioner has been terminated shall be kept vacant. This shall not preclude the respondents from making any ad-hoc arrangements in the meantime. The application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)