IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.47 of 2010 1. RUBY KUMARI W/O SANTOSH THAKUR R/O VILL.- SANUT, P.S.- KHODAWPUR, P.O.- CHHAURAHI, DISTT.- BEGUSARAI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM-CHAIRMAN, SERVE SIKSHA ABHIYAN, BEGUSARAI 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION-CUM-BIHAR PROGRAMME CO- ORDINATOR, SERVE SIKSHA ABHIYAN, BEGUSARAI 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, CHHAURAHI, DISTT.- BEGUSARAI 7. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, CHHAURAHI, DISTT.- BEGUSARAI 8. MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, SANUT, BLOCK- CHHAURAHI, DISTT.- BEGUSARAI 9. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT- SANUT, BLOCK- CHHAURAHI, DISTT.- BEGUSARAI ----------- 02/ 04.05.2010 Petitioner’s case is that she was selected for appointment for the post of Panchayat teacher, and appointment letter no. 467 dated 20.11.2007, was issued, for giving joining at Primary School, Navin Sundar Tole, Patahi. Since, the School in question existed only on paper, she gave her joining in the office of the Headmaster of Controlling School Centre Primary School, Patahi on 15.1.2007. Thereafter, she was transferred from Primary School, Navin Sundar Tole, Patahi to Primary School, Navin Patahi (South). Finally, the petitioner received a letter dated 29.11.2007, informing that under the signature of Panchayat Secretary that appointment of petitioner and - 2 - three other teachers have been found illegal, as per the report contained in letter no. 467 dated 20.11.2007, submitted by the Block Education Extension Officer, Chhaurahi, whereby the Headmaster of the School was directed not to take work from the petitioner and others. Petitioner is not being allowed to work since that date. The petitioner has filed her representation before the District Superintendent of Education and the District Magistrate, which is still pending and no order has been passed. Till date, against the order cancelling her appointment, the petitioner has not approached appropriate forum, by raising her objection. This application is being disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to move before any other appropriate forum, as per the remedy available under the Rule. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)