IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5921 of 2008 SHAHZADI KHATOON W i t h CWJC No.5927 of 2008 MD.MANIRUL HASSAN W i t h CWJC No.6075 of 2008 SAHANA KHATOON Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4/ 11/7/2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and for the interveners. In so far as the intervener is concerned, any grievance with regard to the termination of the services of the intervener has to be the subject matter of a separate writ application and cannot be considered presently. These three matters relate to the appointment on the post of Block Teacher. The petitioners were not selected. On a representation by them, the statutory authority, the Deputy Development Commissioner, Katihar, under Rule-19 of the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 has passed orders which are presently the subject matter for consideration. In so far as the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.6075/08 is concerned, the order of the statutory authority states that she had been appointed as a Panchayat Teacher in the Naya Tola, Bara Raghunathpur and that she had not participated for counseling for appointment on the post of Block Teahcer which is the cause of action in the present writ application. In the writ application this factual - 2 - aspect has not been controverted. There is no merit in C.W.J.C.No.6075/08 which is accordingly rejected. The order of the statutory authority with regard to the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.5927/08 states that public notice was published for counseling. The statutory authority then arrived at its conclusion that there was no occasion for the petitioner not to participate in the counseling. There appears no logic to conclude that there was no reason why the petitioner would not have participated in the counseling to presume his not having been informed of the date when the petitioner has vaguely asserted that he was prevented from attending the counseling. His representation in that regard, annexure- 1, has been perused by the Court which is vague and leaves the court thoroughly dissatisfied on the controversy whether the petitioner had participated in the counseling or not and therefore no relief can be granted to the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.5927/08. It is accordingly dismissed. In C.W.J.C. No.5921/08 the order of the statutory authority states that the petitioner participated in the counseling when it was found that she had higher marks than the person appointed and, thus, the order of termination of the illegal appointee, but denying appointment to the petitioner in view of a fresh Government ban on appointments under the second phase. A counter affidavit has been filed today affirmed by the Deputy Superintendent of Education, Katihar. Paragraph-7 of the - 3 - same emphatically states that the petitioner did not participate in the counseling which has been reiterated in paragraph-8. The statement made in the counter affidavit is in direct conflict with the finding recorded in the order of the statutory authority. Quite obviously, either the recital in the impugned order is incorrect or that on oath in the counter affidavit is incorrect. Either ways, it is a very serious matter going beyond a simple issue of administration. This Court requires the Secretary-Commissioner, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, to examine the matter himself after calling for the original records. This Court next directs the Secretary-cum-Commissioner to take appropriate departmental action as also prosecution under the criminal law with regard to the falsity of statements by either one of them. Let the same be done by the Secretary-cum- Commissioner within a maximum period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before him and consequential action against the concerned delinquent be initiated within four weeks thereafter. Let an affidavit of compliance be filed by the Secretary-cum-Commissioner after 12 weeks when the matter shall be listed for perusal by the Court. In view of the finding of illegalities in the appointments, by the statutory authority, quite naturally consequential action to give effect to the same has to be taken forthwith, if not already taken. - 4 - Before parting with the matter, this Court considers it appropriate to observe that in the event that the Secretary-cum- Commissioner arrives at a finding of the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.5921 of 2008 having participated in the counseling, then, in view of the finding that she was wrongly denied appointment, the petitioner shall be entitled to be considered for appointment on the post to which she was entitled at the original date when the same was denied to her and any subsequent decision of the Government cannot come in the way in view of the available vacancy because of the removal of the person wrongly appointed. C.W.J.C. No.5921/08 stands disposed. KC ( Navin Sinha,J )