IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6997 of 2009 Kumari Rachna, Wife of Thakur Kundan Singh, Resident of Village Phulwaria, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, P.S. Manjhi, Dist. Saran. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director (Primary Education), Human Rsources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Magistrae, Chhapra, Saran. 5. The District Superintendent of Educatin, Chhapra, Saran. 6. The Block Developent Officer, Manjhi, Dist. Chhapra, Saran. 7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Manjhi, Dist. Chhapra, Saran. 8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Tajpur, Block Manjhi, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Chhapra, Saran. 9. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Tajpur, Block- Manjhi, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Chhapra, Saran. 10. Krishna Kumar Chaudhary, son of Uma Shankar Chaudhary, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School Tajpur, P.S. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 11. Gupteshwar Singh son of Suryadeo Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School Jhakhra, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 12. Prita Kumari, D/o Harendra Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary Girls School Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 13. Mamta Kumari, D/o Ramadhar Upadhyay, Panchayat Teacher, Primary Girls School Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Chapra (Saran). 14. Kumkum Kumar, D/o Ram Jitan Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary Girls School-Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Chapra (Saran). 15. Anwari Khatoon, D/o Jakir Ahmad, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 16. Sanjeev Kumar Gaur, son of Baleshwar Sah, Panchayat Teacher, Primary Girls School, Phulwaria, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 17. Chitralekha Kumari, D/o Shatrughan Thakur, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Jhakra-Ke-Tola, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 18. Rambha Pandit, D/o Sudama Pandit, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 19. Sangita Chaudhary, D/o Lallan Jee, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School Jhakra, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 20. Santosh Kumar Chaudhary, S/o Bachcha Narain Chaudhary, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 21. Madan Mohan Das, S/o Adalat Ram, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Phulwaria, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 22. Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary, S/o Paras Nath Chaudhary, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Jhakra, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 23. Vidhya Kumari, D/o Adalat Harijan, Panchayat Teacher, Primary 2 School, Jhakra Ke-Tola, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 24. Rinku Devi, D/o Rajendra Ram, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 25. Manoj Kumar, S/o Asharfi Sah, Panchayat Teacher, Primary Girls School Tajpur, Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 26. Ved Vyas Rai, S/o Satyadeo Yadav, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Jhakra, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 27. Poonam Kumari, D/o Satyadeo Gayadutt, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 28. Arti Kumari, D/o Shivnath Rai, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur. 29. Reena Kumari, D/o Barmeshwar Prasad Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary Girls School Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 30. Meenakshi Kumari, D/o Barmeshwar Prasad Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary Girls School Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 31. Ramesh Kumar Singh, S/o Umesh Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Phulwaria, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 32. Satendra Narain Singh, S/o Ram Naresh Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary Girls School, Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 33. Kiran Kumari, D/o Ramjatan Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary Girls School Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 34. Rajesh Singh, S/o Jai Ram Singh, Panchayat Tajpur Primary Girls School, Tajpur, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 35. Pramod Kumar Singh, S/o Rajeshwar Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Jhakra, P.O. Phulwaria Tajpur, Dist. Saran (Chapra). 36. Sudhir Kumar Singh, S/o Ram Naresh Singh, Panchayat Teacher, Primary School, Jhakra, P.O. Phulwaria, Dist. Saran (Chapra). --------- Respondents ----------------- 8 12.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. I.A. No. 8095 of 2011 For the reasons mentioned in this application, the prayer made therein is allowed and the persons named in paragraph no.2 are hereby directed to be impleaded as respondent no.10 to 36. Let necessary correction in the cage 3 column of the writ application be carried out by the office before issuance of certified copy of this order. The sole petitioner in this writ application has sought a direction for her appointment on the post of Panchayat Shikshak in Tajpur Gram Panchayat on the ground that she has obtained higher marks to the respondent nos. 10 to 36, who in fact have been wrongly allowed to continue in service despite a direction given by the Block Development Officer to terminate their services vide his order dated 31.10.2007, which also was followed by a relieving order passed on 1.11.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner in fact would submit that in terms of Rule 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Shikshak Appointment Rules, 2006, such an order passed by the Block Development Officer on 31.10.2007 was not only well within his jurisdiction but also was to be complied by one and all including the Panchayat Secretary and the Mukhiya, who had deliberately avoided to comply the same for a period of more than eight months. He has also pointed out that subsequently the Collector of Saran district and the District Superintendent of Education, 4 Saran had stepped in at the instance of the Mukhiya Smt. Kanti Devi and an order was passed on 30.6.2008 by the District Superintendent of Education, Saran in the following terms:- ^^dk;kZy; ftyk f”k{kk v/kh{kd] lkj.k vkns”k eka>h iz[kaM dh rktiqj iapk;r esa f{k{kd fu;kstu esa cjrh x;h vfu;ferrk ds laca/k esa iz[kaM fodkl inkf/kdkjh] eka>h] lkj.k ds i=kad 883 fnukad 1-10-07 }kjk izfrosnu izkIr gqvk Fkk ftlesa mYys[k fd;k x;k Fkk fd fu;kstu lwph dks jn~n dj u;s fljs ls fu;kstu dh izfdz;k izkjaHk dh tk;A rnuqlkj ftyk inkf/kdkjh] lkj.k ds i=kad 3471@lh0 fnukad 9-10-07 }kjk iz[kaM fodkl inkf/kdkjh] eka>h] lkj.k ls bl laca/k esa fu;ekoyh 2006 dh dafMdk 18 esa of.kZr izko/kkuksa ds vuq:i dkjZokbZ djrs gq, fu;ekuqlkj fu;kstu dks jn~n ;k la”ksf/kr djus rFkk blds fy, mRrjnk;h O;fDr;ksa ds fo:) dkuquh dkjZokbZ djus ds fy, vkns”k fn;k x;kA bl vkns”k ds vuqikyu esa iz[kaM fodkl inkf/kdkjh] eka>h] lkj.k us vius Kkikad 932 fnukad 30-10-07 }kjk rktiqj iapk;r esa f”k{kd fu;kstu jn~n dj nks’kh O;fDr;ksa ds fo:) izkFkfedh ntZ djk;h x;hA blds mijkUr rktiqj iapk;r dh eqf[k;k Jherh dkfUr nsoh us ftyk inkf/kdkjh] lkj.k ds ;gka ,d vkosnu i= fn;k ftlesa mUgksaus mYys[k fd;k Fkk fd mudh iapk;r esa f”k{kd fu;kstu dh tkWp Jh jatu dqekj flUgk] rRdkyhu dk;Zikyd n.Mkf/kdkjh] lnj vkSj rRdkyhu ftyk f”k{kk v/kh{kd] lkj.k }kjk dh x;h Fkh rFkk mls =qfVghu ik;k x;k FkkA mUgksuas vius vkosnu i= esa ;g Hkh mYys[k fd;k gS fd iz[kM fodkl inkf/kdkjh }kjk nk;j QkStnkjh okn dks vuqla/kkud inkf/kdkjh us vk/kkjghu ikrs gq, vafre izfrosnu nkf[ky djus dh vuq”kalk fd;k gSA bl izfrosnu dks iqfyl v/kh{kd] lkj.k us Hkh lgh ik;k gSA ftyk inkf/kdkjh] lkj.k ds i=kad 1886@lh fnukad 12-5-2008 }kjk bl vkosnu i= esa of.kZr rF;ksa dh tkap v/kksgLrk{kjh dks djus dk funs”k fn;k x;kA tkap esa eqf[k;k] xzke ipk;rjkt rktiqj }kjk of.kZr rF;ksa dks lgh ikrs gq; bl dk;kZy; ds i=kad 1082 fnukad 10-6-2008 }kjk rktiqj iapk;r esa fu;ksftr f”k{kdksa ds ekuns; ds Hkqxrku dh vuq”kalk dh x;hA bl i= ds vkyksd esa ftyk inkf/kdkjh lkj.k us vius i=kad 2375@lh fnukad 27-6-2008 }kjk lE;d vkns”k ikfjr djus dk vkns”k fn;k gSA of.kZr ifjfLFkfr esa ftyk inkf/kdkjh] lkj.k ds vkns”kkuqlkj iz[kaM fodkl inkf/kdkjh eka>h d`i;k rktiqj iapk;r esa fu;ksftr f”k{kdksa ds ekuns; dk Hkqxrku bl “kRrZ ds lkFk djus djus dh d`ik djsa fd ;fn ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; ls dksbZ izfrdwy vkns”k izkIr gksrk gS rks lacaf/kr 5 iapk;r f”k{kd ls mldh ,deq”r olwyh dh tk;sxhA ftyk f”k{kk v/kh{kd lkj.k] Nijk Kkikad 1192@SS/ Nijk] fnukad 30 twu] 2008** Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the Panchayat Shikshak Appointment Rules, 2006, there is no power vested either in the Collector of the district to issue any direction as with regard to the selection, appointment and/or continuance of a Panchayat Shikshak. He has also pointed out that when the competent Authority namely Block Development Officer, Manjhi vide letter no. 932 dated 30.10.2007 had cancelled the appointment of all the 27 persons, namely, respondent nos. 10 to 36, the Collector or the District Superintendent of Education had no business to interfere with such order of the Block Development Officer and in any event, the so-called conclusion made by the police in the connected investigating undertaken by it cannot be made basis for examining the selection process of the post of Panchayat Shikshak. Counsel for the State has not filed any counter affidavit and has only submitted that the order passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Saran on 6 30.6.2008 has clothed the respondent nos. 10 to 36 certain right of continuing in service and since they are continuing in service for more than four years, they should not be disturbed. He has suggested that the matter should be remitted to the District Teachers Appellate Authority, Saran, who may pass a final order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as also to the respondent nos. 10 to 36 as well as the concerned Panchayat Secretary and the Mukhiya. In the considered opinion of this Court, the recourse suggested by the learned counsel for the State is worth acceptance. The respondent nos. 10 to 36 even when their appointment was already cancelled by a competent authority in his order dated 30.10.2007 have continued in service for a period over four years and that too on the strength of an order of the District Superintendent of Education, Saran in his memo no. 1192 dated 30th June, 2008, who has no role to play in the selection, appointment, continuance or termination of service of Panchayat Teacher. As a matter of fact, even the District Superintendent of Education, Saran, while passing the order 7 dated 30.6.2008, has not been guided by his own rather he too has gone on a dictation given by the Collector of Saran district in his letter no. 2375/C dated 27.6.2008. This Court would really admonish the conduct of the Collector of Saran district for interfering in the functioning of Panchayat and/or selection and appointment on the post of Panchayat Shikshak. The Collector of the Saran district even if he had found the order of the Block Development Officer to be wrong or worth revision, he had to only report the matter to the State Government for taking a fresh decision in terms of the rules. Considering the fact that the order of the Block Development Officer and the concerned Block Manjhi in terms of Rule 18 of 2006 Rules was a valid order and the respondent nos. 10 to 36 could not have continued in service after 1.11.2007, this Court would remit the matter back to the District Teachers Appellate Authority where the petitioner should file a complaint. If the Authority finds that the order of the Block Development Officer, Manjhi dated 31.10.2007 was itself in violation of principle of natural justice, inasmuch as, the same was passed without issuance of a 8 notice and/or opportunity of hearing to the respondent nos. 10 to 36, it will direct the concerned Block Development Officer/Panchayat Secretary to send the copy of complaint of the petitioner and other papers to the Authority and proceed to decide the complaint afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well Respondents 10 to 36 and without being influenced either by the order of the Collector of Saran or the District Superintendent of Education, Saran. If, however, in course of enquiry, the Authority will find that the Block Development Officer had complied the principle of natural justice and had heard respondent nos. 10 to 36, he would simply implement the order of the Block Development Officer by directing the concerned Authority to immediately remove the respondent nos. 10 to 36. Since the respondent no.10 to 36 are not before this Court, it has to be made clear that the Authority shall decide the dispute without being also influenced by anything said in this order. In the event, the petitioner is found to have secured more marks and yet ignored in selection and appointment on the post of Panchaya Shiksha, the Authority, 9 while allowing the case of the petitioner, would also direct the concerned Panchayat to appoint the petitioner. However, such an exercise must be concluded within a period of six months from the date of filing of the complaint by the petitioner enclosing a copy of this order and other evidence that she would like to rely in support of her case. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)