IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.363 of 2010 1. Mritunjay Mishra, son of Nirmal Mishra, resident of Parman, P.S. Katoriya, District Banka, the Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Jamdah, P.S. Katoriya, District Banka 2. The Chairman Sukh Subidha Samiti, Gram Panchayat Jamdah, District Banka through its Mukhiya namely Mritunjay Mishra ……..Appellants Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2. The Director, Primary Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. The District Magistrate, Banka 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Banka 5. The Block Development Officer, Katoriya within District Banka 6. The Block Education Officer, Katoriya within the District Banka 7. Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Jamadah within District Banka 8. Pinku Kumari wife of Gurudat Bharti, resident of village Merha, P.S. Katoriya, District Banka ………..Respondents ----------- 2 15.3.2010 Heard Mr. Rashid Alam for the appellants and Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, learned A.C. to G.A.1 for respondent nos.1 to 6. This appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna has been preferred by respondent nos.7 and 9 of C.W.J.C.No.14043 of 2009, and raise a grievance with respect to the order dated 25.1.2010, whereby a learned Single Judge of this court has allowed the writ petition and directed respondent nos. 4 to 9 of the writ proceeding to make payment of arrears of salary to the writ petitioner. 2 We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the appellants rightly raise a grievance that they were not afforded any opportunity at all to file their counter affidavit in the writ proceeding. The writ petition was lodged in this court on 26.10.2009, and was for the first time laid before the learned Single Judge on 25.1.2010, on which date the writ petition was allowed. No notice was issued to respondent nos.7 to 9. It is evident on the face of it that respondent nos.7 to 9 were not afforded any opportunity at all to file counter affidavit and represent their case. Justice hurried is justice buried. It is further relevant to state that, in the scheme of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006, a gram panchayat is a separate legal entity with a common seal and perpetual succession and can sue and be sued in its own name. It is obviously an independent entity, separate from the State of Bihar. The representation of the State of Bihar in such proceedings cannot, in the scheme of the Act, mean representation of the gram panchayat. Sub-section (3) of Section 11 of the Act reads as follows: “ Every Gram Panchayat shall be a body 3 Corporate by the name of its Gram Panchayat and shall have perpetual succession and a common seal and subject to such restrictions as are imposed by or under this Act or any other enactment, shall be vested with the capacity of suing or being sued in its corporate name, of acquiring, holding and transferring property, movable or immovable, whether without or within the limits of the area over which it has authority, or entering into contracts and of doing all things necessary, proper and expedient for the purpose for which it is constituted”. One of us (S.K. Katriar,J), had the occasion sitting singly to deal with this issue in the case of Vijay Shanker Pathak vs. The State of Bihar & Ors, reported in 2007(3) PLJR 621, and followed in the case of Smt. Sugapati Devi Vs State of Bihar & Ors, reported in 2008(1) P.L.J.R.466. We must sound the requisite note of caution that the present order should not be taken to be an expression of our views as to the correctness or otherwise of the judgment in the case of Smt. Sugapati Devi (supra), for two reasons. Those judgment does not directly arise for our consideration and, secondly, the same was 4 KHAN rendered by one of us sitting singly. The same is being relied on for the limited purpose of disposal of the present appeal. In that view of the matter, we are constrained to set aside the order dated 25.1.2010, passed in C.W.J.C.No. 14043 of 2009. Let the matter be placed before the learned Single Judge for final disposal in accordance with law and the observations made hereinabove. (S.K.Katriar,J) (S.P.Singh,J)