IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12224 of 2010 1. SUDHIR KUMAR S/O RAMA SHISH YADAV R/O VILL.- AKABARPUR, P.O.- CHODHADRAGAH, P.S.- AARIYARI, DISTT.- SHEIKHPURA----- -------------------------------------------PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE OFFICE OF APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF DISTRICT TEACHERS EMPLOYMENT JAMUI 3. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, JAMUI 4. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY-CUM-DIRECTOR PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA 5. THE PRINCIPAL, PRIMARY SCHOOL CHHODIHA, JAMUI, DISTT.- JAMUI-----------------------------------RESPONDENTS ----------- 4 17.5.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Member, District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Jamui has adopted two yard-sticks in the same set of facts while giving relief seems to be now borne out from the stand taken by the Block Development Officer, Jamui in the counter affidavit filed today. The assertion made therein coupled with the annexures does show that the case of the present petitioner was no different from the case of Ram Bhajan Choudhary except that Ram Bhajan Choudhary’s joining was accepted by the headmaster on 11.3.2008 but for no apparent, cogent or legal reason petitioner was discriminated. Ram Bhajan Choudhary approached the appellate authority Jamui and order came to be passed in his favour. But when the petitioner moved before the appellate authority in identical situation his claim was rejected in terms of annexure-1 stating that he had gone for joining after almost three months and - 2 - ten days. This Court fails to understand the superfine distinction between the facts of the case of the present petitioner and the case of other persons including Ram Bhajan Choudhary. The Court is inclined to agree with the counsel for the petitioner that the reasons for giving to two different conclusions could be extraneous, not strictly within the parameter of law. Whether it is a case of over sight or intentional cannot be certified in the present proceeding but the Court certainly would like to record that the Member needs to be more careful in future in adjudication of such dispute least he would be accused of nepotism and other things. Annexure-1 is quashed. This writ application is allowed. A direction is issued upon the headmaster of the school in question that joining of the petitioner be taken without any let or hindrance. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)