IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17927 of 2008 KUMARI ANKITA W/o Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh,resident of Village Baraipatti P.S.Mirganj,District Gopalganj. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary,Human Resources Development Department,Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.The District Magistrate,Gopalganj 3.The District Superintendent of Education,Gopalganj 4.The Block Development Officer,Hathua Block,Gopalganj 5.The Block Education Extension Officer,Hathua Block Gopalganj. 6.The Mukhiya-cum-Chairman of Selection Committee, Gram Panchayat Chhap P.S.Mirganj District Gopalganj 7.The Gram Panchayat Sevak-cum-Member,Dist.Gopalganj 8.Mrs.Punam Kumar W/o Sri Raj Kishore Singh, resident of Village Chhap P.O. Chhap Mathiya P.S.Mirganj Dist. Gopalganj. ----------- 2 17.3.2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. This application has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order contained in Memo no.1677 dated 27.8.2008 issued under the signature of District Superintendent of Education,Gopalganj directing the Block Development Officer,Hathua to take necessary steps for canceling the appointment of the petitioner and for recovery of the amount paid to her as salary. Further prayer is for quashing the order issued by the B.D.O.Hathua cancelling petitioner’s appointment and to recover the amount paid as salary. Petitioner’s case is that the impugned orders have been passed in her absence on the basis of an ex-parte enquiry. She was not noticed neither any opportunity was given to her to place her case before the authority enquiring into the irregularities in appointment of teachers. The impugned order shows that some irregularities were found in appointment of the petitioner. Respondent no.8 Punam Kumari having higher marks was not appointed and the 2 petitioner having lesser marks was appointed. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact respondent no.8 did not participate in counseling as such she was not appointed, even though possessed higher marks. These questions can be decided only on perusal of the concerned record and examining persons connected with the process of appointment. This cannot be done by this court sitting in the writ jurisdiction. The District Level Tribunal constituted under 2008 Rules is competent to enquire into such matters and pass order in accordance with law. The petitioner is directed to file her representation before the tribunal, within four weeks from today.The tribunal after giving opportunity to the concerned persons including the petitioner and looking into relevant records will pass order. The order must be passed in accordance with law within three months from the date of filing such representation. Till the date, petitioner’s representation is disposed of, there shall not be any recovery and no fresh appointment against the post held by the petitioner. With the aforesaid direction/observations, this application is disposed of. Sss/- (Mridula Mishra, J)