IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1957 of 2007 1. KAUSHAL KISHORE SINGH SON OF JANARDAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SALAHAPUR, UNDER GRAM PANCHAYAT BALIYA, POST OFFICE AND POLICE STATION AND BLOCK ANDHAR. 2. VIJAY KUMAR SHARMA SON OF SRI RAM SINGAR SHARMA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O. SOHAGRA, UNDER GRAM PANCHAYAT DARALLA( NEW SOHAGRA), POLICE STATION AND BLOCK GUTHNI . 3. BACHCHA PRASAD YADAV SON OF SRI PARICHAND YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HARDOBARA, UNDER GRAM PANCHAYAT AND P.O. BABHANBORA, POLICE STATION AND BLOCK BARHARIA 4. BRIJ BIHARI DUBEY SON OF SRI ISHWARCHAND DUBEY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NAWALPUR, P.O. MAHARAJGANJ,. UNDER GRAM PANCHAYAT KOTHUAN SARANGPUR, POLICE STATION AND BLOCK DARAUNDA 5. BASHUDEO SINGH SON OF SRI DEOSARAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JASHAULI PAKAULI, P.O. AND GRAM PANCHAYAT JASHAULI, POLICE STATION AND BLOCK PACHRUKHI. 6. BINOD KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE BISHAWNATH SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PURAINA, P.O. RACHHOPALI, UNDER GRAM PANCHAYAT BHAMOPALI, PURAINA, POLICE STATION AND BLOCK BARAHRIA. 7. YOGENDRA PRASAD SON OF SRI RAM PRASAD RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PAITHLISH, P.O. PALTUHANTA UNDER GRAM PANCHAYAT RACHHOPALI JAGARNATHPUR, POLICE STATION JAMO, BLOCK BARHARIA. 8. JIVAN PRASAD SON OF LATE MAHADEO PRASAD RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-GOPAL PUR, P.O. AND GRAM PANCHAYAT MUSTAPHABAD, POLICE STATION AND BLOCK GORIYA KOTHIT. 9. ARJUN KUMAR SAH SON OF GOPCHAND SAH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE, POST AND GRAM PANCHAYAT DADHARA, POLICE STATION AND BLOCK GORIYA KOTHI. 10. AMARJIT YADAV SON OF LATE SHEO NATH YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND GRAM PANCHAYAT AURAI, P.S. AND BLOCK BARHARIA, ALL BEINGS TO DISTRICT OF SIWAN---- PETITIONERS Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. DIPAK PRASAD THE SECRETARY CUM-COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT ( PANCHAYATI RAJ) GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. JAGARNATH SHARMA THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYAT RAJ GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. A.K. CHAUHAN THE COMMISSIONER SARAN DIVISION CHAPRA 5. SANTOSH KUMAR MALL THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SIWAN- CUM-CHARIAMN, DISTRICT PANCHAYAT SEWAK SELECTION COMMITTEE, SIWAN 6. PRABHAKAR JHA THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER SIWAN CUM-VICE CHAIRMAN DISTRICT PANCHAYAT SEWAK SELECTION COMMITTEE SIWAN 7. BINOD KUMAR JHA THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER SIWAN- CUM-MEMBERS SECRETARY DISTRICT PANCHAYAT SEWAK 2 SELECTION COMMITTEE, SIWAN---CONTEMNOR/OPPOSITE PARTIES.. with MJC No.2400 of 2007 1. LALBABU KUMAR SINGH 2. SHIV KUMAR SINGH 3. RABINDRA SHARMA 4. ARVIND KUMAR 5. RAJ KUMAR SINGH 6. SATAY PRAKASH GUPTA 7. CHANDRASHEKHAR KUMAR 8. MAHESH PRASAD SINGH 9. DINESHWAR RAI 10. RADHESHWAR PRASAD 11. CHANDRIKA YADAV 12. DHRUBSEN KUMAR 13. JAIRAM SINGH 14. BIRENDRA PRASAD SINGH 15. RAMVIJAY SINGH 16. ANUJ KUMAR 17. SHAYAMANANDAN SHARMA 18. BHIMRAJ YADAV 19. NAND LAL PRASAD SINGH 20. YOGENDRA KUMAR 21. RAMESH KUMAR SINGH 22. ASHOK KUMAR 23. SAROJ KUMAR 24. BINOD KUMAR SINGH ALL BELONGS TO THE DISTRICT OF PATNA-------- PETITIONERS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS .(ALL RESPONDENTS ARE SAME IN THE FIRST CASE) with MJC No.2324 of 2007 MD.TAIYAB , SON OF LATE MD. NASIR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE GANGAPATII, UNDER GRAM PANCHAYAT-PURAB BARUARI, POLICE STATION AND DISTRICT SUPAUL----PETITIONER. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. DIPAK PRASAD THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT(PANCHAYATI RAJ) GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, VISHASHARIYA BHAWAN, PATNA 3. R.S. DAFTUAR THE INCHARGE, DIRECTOR PANCHAYATI RAJ, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. MD. SARIF ALAM, THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SUPAUL 5. NIRANJAN KUMAR CHAUDHARY THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SAHARSA 6. NIGINA SHARMA THE DISTRICT PANCHAYATI RAJ OFFICER, SUPAUL 7. AJAY KUMAR SINGH, THE DISTRICT PANCHAYATI RAJ OFFICER,L SAHARSA-----CONTEMNER/OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 3 For the Petitioners:- Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, Advocate For the State:- Mr. S.K.Ghosh, AAG-II 14 30. 03.2010 Petitioners have filed an application for initiating a proceeding for contempt against the Opposite parties/contemnors for willful and deliberate violation of order dated 12.3.2007 passed in CWJC No. 8668 of 2005, CWJC No.9550 of 2000 and CWJC No.10881 of 2000. The writ applications were heard analogous and a direction had been issued to the respondent authorities for considering the case of the petitioners’ for appointment on the post of Panchayat Sewak/Secretary, in case they fulfilled requisite criteria for same. The case of the petitioners in the writ applications was that though they fulfilled requisite criteria for the post, but their cases were not considered, on account of ban put by the finance department in the matters of appointment. Subsequently the ban being relaxed, their cases should have been considered, giving relaxation in the age, against the vacancies existing prior to coming into force of the new Rules. The directions in the writ applications 4 was for considering the case of petitioners for appointment on the post of Panchayat Sewak/Secretary and completing entire exercise of appointment within four months of the date of production/communication of the order. Initially show cause was filed by the Opposite parties stating that the State Government has preferred Letters Patent Appeals against the order passed in the writ applications, as such the matter of contempt be considered after the disposal of Letters Patent Appeal. Letters Patent Appeal No. 789 of 2006 and other analogous appeals were decided by judgment and order dated 11.8.2009. In the LPA it was held that in view of the legal position, a Dalpati as a matter of right, cannot claim to be considered for appointment as Panchayat Secretary. The contention advanced on behalf of the writ petitioners, that State Government should fill up the posts of Panchayat Secretaries from the open market, only if candidates are not available from amongst the Dalpatis was rejected. However, the submission of the Advocate General that the State Government is promise- 5 bound to appoint 531 Panchayat Secretaries from amongst Dalpatis, for the reason that the same is being done in compliance of the order of this Court in such cases which have attained finality, was noted down. The LPA Bench also clarified that only those Dalpatis, not exceeding 531 persons, would be appointed/promoted on the post of Panchayat Sewak/Secretary in different Panchayats of the State, whose names have been approved by the Staff Selection Commission. The writ petitioners, who had approached the Court earlier and in whose favour orders have been passed, shall be treated similarly. A supplementary show cause was filed on behalf of Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Bihar, Patna. In paragraph 7 of the supplementary show cause it was stated that posts are only available in 22 districts for the appointment of Panchayat Secretary. So far the districts to which the writ petitioners belonged, there is no vacancy and the case of the petitioners do not come within the 531 posts, as such their cases could not be considered for appointment as Panchayat Secretary. 6 Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, counsel appearing for the petitioners tried his level best to make it a case of contempt of the orders passed in the writ applications but considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I find that simple direction of this Court in the writ applications was for consider of petitioner’s cases for appointment. But the development, which has taken place later on, as well as the order passed by the L.P.A. Bench, is sufficient to hold that no case of contempt is made out. Accordingly, all these contempt proceedings are dropped. (Mridula Mishra,J.) A.Kumar