IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.20073 of 2010 Anuchi Kumari, W/o Sri Amit Kumar, resident of at Moglanichak, P.O.Kosut, P.S.Dhanarua, District Patna--------------------------petitioner Versus 1.The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Patna 2.The District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal, Patna, Govt. Girls High School, Bankipur, Golghar, Patna 3.The District Magistrate, Patna at Patna 4.The District Superintendent of Education, Patna at Patna 5.The Block Development Officer, Dhanarua, Patna 6.The Block Education Extension Officer, Dhanarua, District Patna 7.Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Kosut, Block Dhanarua, District Patna 8.Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Kusut, Block Dhanarua, District Patna------------------------------------------------------respondents ----------- For the petitioner :Mr.Binod Kumar, Advocate For the State :Mr.Dilip Kumar, AC to G.A.2 ----- 2. 13.7.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 22.6.2010 passed by the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Patna. The petitioner claims to have been appointed on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra which has become vacant after removing the Shiksha Mitras who did not fulfil the eligibility qualification of I.A./I.Sc. within 33 months from their first appointment as Panchayat Shiksha Mitras as the said Shiksha Mitras had been appointed while they were Matriculate. The petitioner claims to have been appointed 2 on 23.2.2006 and joined as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in Middle School, Kosut, Dhanarua on 24.2.2006. It appears that the Mukhiya elected subsequently wrote a letter to the District Superintendent of Education, Patna regarding the irregularities committed in the appointment of Panchayat Shiksha Mitras. The matter was got enquired into by the authorities and the matter ultimately went to the District Magistrate, Patna, who by his order dated 14.6.2007 after noting the facts stated in the enquiry report submitted by the Block Education Extension Officer, Dhanarua, has stated that the previous Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary had by their joint signatures on 16.2.2006 appointed Smt.Sunita Kumari, Smt. Anuchi Kumari(the petitioner) and Sri Anil Kumar in three different Primary Schools of the Panchayat. Again the ex-Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary appointed by letter dated 18.2.2006 one Nagendra Kumar in place of the earlier Smt.Sunita Kumari in a Primary School. Again on 23.2.2006 three persons including the earlier Smt.Sunita Kumari and Anil Kumar as also the petitioner were appointed in Government Middle School, Kosut. Again after one day, i.e., on 24.2.2006 the previous letter of appointment dated 23.2.2006 was 3 changed and two candidates were appointed. It is further pointed out by the District Magistrate that the ex-Mukhiya and the Panchayat Secretary had in one week issued four letters appointing different candidates to different schools and kept on making the changes in the appointment letters and has also noted that the entire appointment of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra was done in an irregular manner. Accordingly by letter dated 15.6.2007 (Annexure-7) the District Magistrate directed the Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Dhanarua to cancel the appointment of the petitioner and two other persons appointed by the ex- Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary. On the basis of the said direction of the District Magistrate the Mukhiya removed the petitioner by letter dated 6.10.2007. The petitioner thereafter filed C.W.J.C.No.15070 of 2007. This Court on the basis of submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner by order dated 23.7.2009 disposed of the writ petition giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority within one week which was directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders after giving notice to the concerned authorities and thereafter a modification 4 petition bearing MJC No. 320 of 2010 was also filed by the petitioner which was disposed of by order dated 5.5.2010 reiterating the earlier order. The petitioner thereafter filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority who by the impugned order dated 22.6.2010 has rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers(Appointment and Service Condition) Rules, 2006 the District Magistrate could not have directed the cancellation of the appointment of the petitioner, that too, without issuing any notice to the petitioner and without hearing. It is submitted that the Appellate Authority ought to have allowed the appeal of the petitioner on the basis of the said fact alone that the petitioner had not been given an opportunity of being heard by the District Magistrate. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the Appellate Authority has considered all aspects of the matter in its order and come to the conclusion that the petitioner had been appointed in a hot haste within a period of four days, i.e., from 14.2.2006 to 17.2.2006 without complying with any of the requirements 5 as per the Government Resolution No.1458 dated 11.8.2004 which provides that on intimation of vacancies arising against the sanctioned units permitting appointment on contract the Aam Sabha of the Panchayat would be called in which the date of receiving applications, the advertising of the same and publishing the vacancies in the notice board of the Panchayat Circle and Block Office is required. After at least 15 days from the publication of the notice, the register of applications was to be prepared which had to be verified by the Mukhiya. But no such thing was done and without any advertisement, without preparing any merit list, without calling the Officer the appointment of the petitioner had been made within a period of four days of receiving the application from the petitioner. It is further contended that the appointment could only have been made in the same school where the vacancies had occurred, namely, Primary School, Kiranichak or Primary School, Kewalichak from where the appointment of the Shiksha Mitra, who was appointed on contract basis, was not extended but instead of doing the same the petitioner had been appointed in Government 6 Middle School, Kosut, Dhanarua. It is also pointed out that the order states the fact that in the year 2006 in Kosut Panchayat there was no vacancy available according to the roster and thus the Appellate Authority found that in the appointment of the petitioner as Shiksha Mitra all the laid down procedures had been violated. Accordingly, the petitioner’s appeal has been rejected. On a consideration of the submissions of the parties and the facts on the record as also those narrated in the order of the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority there can hardly be any doubt that gross irregularities had been committed in the appointment of the petitioner by the ex-Mukhiya without following any procedure and in the light of the said facts it cannot be held that the order passed by the Appellate Authority suffers from any error or is vitiated on any count. Considering the fact that the appointment of the petitioner suffers from gross irregularities, this Court does not consider it fit to go into the issue of the District Magistrate not giving an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard in the matter. This Court would not set aside an order which will have the effect of reviving an illegal 7 situation. Moreover, all aspects of the issues raised by the petitioner and by the respondents have been considered by the Appellate Authority while rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed. (Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.) Spal/