IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5589 of 2011 Mamta Kumari , wife of Ramesh Sah, R.O.V Marwan, P.O. Marwan, P.S. Sakra, dist-Muzaffarpur. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner, Tirhut Commissonary, at Muzaffarpur, Dist- Muzaffarpur. 3. The District Magistrate, Muzafffarpur,. 4. The Child Development Project Officer At C.D.P.O. Office at Sakra Block Under District-Muzaffarpur. 5. The Block Development Officer at Sakara Block Dist-Muzaffarpur. 6. The Mukhiya Panchayt Raj Marwan @Aziz Nagar/Via Silaut at P.O. Marwan, Dist-Muzaffarpur. 7. The Gram Panchayat Secretary, at Panchayt Raj Marwan @Aziz Nagar via Silaut at P.O. Marwan, Distt- Muzaffarpur. 8. Poonam Kumari wife of Sujit Kumar, AT+P.O. Marwan @ Aziz Nagar P.S. & Sakara, Dist-Muzaffarpur. ----------- 2. 06.05.2011 From Annexure 9, it appears that the petitioner had moved this Court earlier and it was submitted that petitioner had filed a representation before the Commissioner, Tirhut Division which should be disposed of. Hence, the said writ application was disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner to dispose of her representation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact the Commissioner had already passed an order as contained in Annexure-7. Hence, it was not expected from him to review his own order. From Annexure 7, it appears that on an application filed by respondent No. 8 in Janta Darbar, the Commissioner took up the matter, got some inquiries held and passed interim order directing the respondent No. 8 to work on provisional basis. Since, respondent No. 8 had claimed in her application that one forged application on her behalf was supposed to be filed tendering her resignation was entertained, her candidature was not considered 2 and the petitioner was appointed. The Commissioner also directed for comparison of her signature on the said application by a hand writing expert. This also shows that the said order of the Commissioner was an interim order. Learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was neither noticed nor heard before that order was passed. Since the order is clearly an interim one, the Commissioner is supposed to take a final decision in the matter. In the process he is also required to issue notice to the parties and hear them. Since, the petitioner was already appointed, this consideration must be done by the Commissioner and final orders must be passed by him after hearing the parties, within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Prakash ( J.N.Singh, J.)