IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 7201 of 2004 Md Taiyab, son of late Md Jimdar, resident of village – Bhutahi, Police Station – Sonabarsa, District – Sitamarhi - Petitioner Versus 1 The State of Bihar 2 The Collector, Sitamarhi 3 The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi 4 The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sitamarhi 5 The Officer-in-Charge, Sonabarsa Police Station, Sonabarsa, District – Sitamarhi 6 Dinesh Mahto, son of late Achhelal Mahto, resident of village – Bhutahi, P S – Sonabarsa, District – Sitamarhi - Respondents *** For the petitioner : Mr Dinesh Jha, Advocate For the S t a t e : Mr Jai Shankar Barnwal, SC I With Mr Satish Kr Sinha, AC to SC I For respondent No 6 : Dr Amrendra Kr, Advocate *** 6 07.01.2011 The petitioner, who is the son of late Md Jimdar, has come to this Court seeking his appointment as Village Chaukidar in relation to Village – Bhutahi, Police Station – Sonabarsa, District – Sitamarhi. Petitioner’s case is that petitioner’s grand father, in the British time itself, was Chaukidar of Village – Bhutahi – Bit No 2/14 during his lifetime. After his death, his eldest son being Md Subedar was appointed the Village Chaukidar for the said replacement. After the death of Md Subedar, the younger brother of Md Subedar being the father of the petitioner was appointed Chaukidar who also died while in service. It is the case of the petitioner that after the death of petitioner’s father, the elder brother of petitioner one Md Masso was appointed as the Village Chaukidar. It is further alleged that one Achhelal Mahto conspired with 2 the Mukhiya and got a false case instituted against the said Md Masso being Sonabarsa Police Station Case No 25 of 1985 by virtue whereof the said Md Masso was suspended and ultimately he died. Before his death, Md Masso was acquitted but in the meantime, the said Achhelal Mahto, who had instituted the case against Md Masso, got himself appointed as Village Chaukidar because of absence of Md Masso. Upon acquittal of Md Masso and his subsequent death, petitioner, who is younger brother of Md Masso, has been trying to get the post back as the post is said to be virtually hereditary as per Government policy. The petitioner states that he had also filed an appeal before the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi being Appeal No 117 of 1997 which is still pending. In the meantime, upon death of Achhelal Mahto, Dinesh Mahto, son of Achhelal Mahto has been appointed as Village Chjaudkidar. Dinesh Mahto has been made respondent No 6 and was noticed by the Court. He has appeared and filed a counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, Dinesh Mahto categorically states that petitioner has wrongly stated that petitioner’ elder brother Md Masso was appointed as Village Chaukidar. In fact, it was one Md Abbas, another brother of the petitioner who was appointed as Village Chaukidar after the death of petitioner’s father but as he was convicted in relation to Sonabarsa Police Station Case No 51 of 1984 in Sessions Trial No 7 of 1986/29 of 1988 by the Additional Sessions Judge II, Sitamarhi, the appointment came to an end and, thus, the hereditary right ceased and the father of respondent No 6 was appointed. Unfortunately, even though this is a writ petition of the year 2004, State has chosen to remain silent in the matter and no counter 3 affidavit has been filed. In my view, having considered the facts aforesaid, it is not possible for this Court to conclude the matter without much further delay. The better option would be to remand the matter to the District Magistrate Sitamarhi before whom the appeal of the petitioner is said to be pending. District Magistrate, Sitamarhi is directed to take up the appeal if it is not already disposed of and after notice to the parties and perusing the documents available on record and in his office, pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within six months from the date of production of a copy of this order before him. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)