IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.455 of 2008 ARUN KUMAR, SON OF SRI RAM AUTAR YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-SURAMANACHAK, P.S. SHAKURABAD, DISTRICT-JEHANABAD ……. PETITIONER. with CWJC No.2043 of 2008 AMARJEET KUMAR, SON OF SRI GOVING YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-SURAMACHAK, P.S. SHAKURABAD, DISTRICT-JEHANABAD …… PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt of Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Jehanabad. 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Jehanabad. 6. The Block Development Officer, Ratni Faridpur, Circle, Ratni Faridpur, Jehanabad. 7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Shakurabad, Jehanabad. 8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Sesamba, District- Jehanabad. ………………….. Respondents (in both cases.) ----------- 2. 18.11.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing for the state. Petitioners, in both the writ applications, have been removed from service on the basis of the order dated 04.08.2006 bearing Gayapank No. 990, Jehanabad issued by the District Superintendent of Education, Jehanabad which was affirmed by the order dated 18.07.2007 bearing Gayapank No. 538 by the District Magistrate, Jehanabad in Misc. Case No. 01 of 2007-08. Petitioners have also prayed for their reinstatement in service with effect from the date of their termination, i.e. 04.08.2006 with all consequential benefits. Petitioners were initially appointed on the post of 2 Panchayat Shikcha Mitras in Gram Panchayat , Sasamba, Jehanabad. Their case is that observing the reservation policy as well as merit of the aspirants, appointment letters were issued in their favour by the Mukhiya of concerned Gram Panchayat and they joined in their respective schools. Subsequently, the District Superintendent of Education, Jehanabad conducted an inquiry relating to the appointment of Panchayat Shikcha Mitras in the Gram Panchayat, Sesambi and came out with a finding that in violation of the reservation roster, appointments were made and issued letter of removal from service against the petitioners vide letter bearing No. Gayapank No. 990 dated 04.08.2006. The order issued by the District Superintendent of Education, Jehanabad was challenged by the petitioners by filing C.W.J.C. No. 11152 of 2006. The writ application was disposed of directing the District Magistrate, Jehanabad to examine the issue and pass necessary orders on filing such representation by the petitioners. Three persons including two petitioners, had been removed by the District Superintendent of Education, Jehanabad and jointly, they have challenged the termination order by filing C.W.J.C. No. 11152 of 2006. All three persons have represented before the District Magistrate, Jehanabad and it was registered as Miscellaneous Case No. 01 of 2007-08. The District Magistrate, Jehanabad recorded his finding dated 18.07.2007 whereby the finding recorded by the District Superintendent of Education, Jehanabad relating to non-observance of reservation roster, was not found 3 correct. However, for some other reasons, like- non participation of the Panchayat Secretary and senior most headmaster in the meeting of Sukh Subidha Committee as well as some interpolation in the selection register, a finding was recorded that appointments were not made legally. One of the Panchayat Shikcha Mitras, namely Suraj Prakash whose service has also been held illegal, challenged the order passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Jehanabad as well as the District Magistrate, Jehanabad by filing C.W.J.C. No. 234/08. Petitioners as well as Suraj Prakash had already been absorbed on the part of Panchayat teacher in terms of Rule 20 of Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment & Service Conditions), rule, 2006. The District Magistrate, held their appointment on the post of Panchayat Shikcha Mitra as an illegal appointment. The writ application filed by Suraj Prakash was allowed by order dated 07.04.2009 holding that, “ the District Magistrate, could have examined legality of the appointment on any other issue of illegality, the issue falling for consideration is that if the District Magistrate, proposed to uphold the termination of the petitioner on fresh grounds, he was required to give a fresh show cause notice to the petitioner and adequate opportunity to meet the new grounds especially when the earlier grounds of termination have been found to be nonest. The manner in which the District Magistrate, has chosen to spring a surprise upon the petitioner, satisfies this court that the order is not sustainable in its present 4 form. Any termination of the petitioner on fresh grounds can only be after furnishing him the grounds for such termination and adequate opportunity to meet the same. In absence of such procedure, the impugned order dated 18.07.2009 is not sustainable, which is accordingly, set aside.” The impugned order which is under challenge in both these writ applications, has already been set aside for the aforesaid reasons as stated in the order dated 07.04.2009 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 234/08. Petitioners’ case is fully covered by the order dated 07.04.2008 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 234/08 for the reason that their appointments has also been terminated by the District Magistrate, by the same impugned order. Accordingly, impugned orders under challenge, in both the writ applications passed by the District Magistrate, Jehanabnad as well as District Superintendent of Education, Jehanabad contained in Annexures-5 & 7 are quashed. These writ applications are allowed. In the given circumstance, petitioners are entitled for reinstatement with all consequential benefits. AKV/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)