IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13098 of 2009 1. REKHA SHARMA W/O JYOTISH KUMAR SHARMA, D/O SHIV NANDAN SHARMA VILL.- POKARIA, P.O.- DHARHAN, P.S.- PRANPUR, DISTT.- KATIHAR .... PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA 2. THE ZILA SHICKSCHAK NIYOJAN APPELEYA PRADHIKAR, KATIHAR THROUGH ITS SECRETARY 3. THE COMMISSIONER, HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, KATIHAR. 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KATIHAR 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, KATIHAR 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENTION OFFICER, PRANPUR, P.S.- PRANPUR, DISTRICT- KATIHAR 7. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, DHARHAN, P.S.- PRANPUR, DISTT.- KATIHAR 8. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT DHARHAN, P.S.- PRANPUR, DISTT.- KATIHAR 9. RINKU KUMARI D/O SHRI DIPENDRA DEO VILL.- DRIVAR TOLA, P.S.- KATIHAR, DISTT.- KATIHAR AT PRESENT WORKING AS PANCHAYAT TEACHER IN PRIMARY SCHOOL KEWATIA, PRANPUR(EAST), DISTT.- KATIHAR ...... RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 04.01.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing for the State. Prayer of the petitioner is for issuance of a direction to give effect to the order dated 22.6.2009 and amended order dated 17.8.2009 passed by District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Katihar in Appeal No. 37 of 2008. The tribunal by order dated 22.6.2009 as well as by order dated 17.8.2009 has cancelled the appointment of respondent no. 9, Rinku Kumari and directed to appoint the petitioner in place of Rinku Kumari. It transpires that prior - 2 - to that said Rinku Kumari, respondent no. 9 had preferred an appeal Vide Appeal No. 578 of 2009 before the same tribunal and by order dated 30.3.2009 contained in Memo No. 91/09 the District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Katihar has quashed the order, whereby Rinku Kumari’s appointment has been cancelled. Rinku Kumari was appointed as Panchayat Teacher and joined on 12.3.2007 and since then she was continuously working, but by the orders of the Block Education Extension Officer, Pranpur and District Superintendent of Education, the Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary of the Gram Panchayat had cancelled her appointment. This order was challenged by Rinku Kumari by filing an appeal vide Appeal No. 578 of 2009 and the Appellate Tribunal had allowed the appeal by quashing the impugned order of termination. Again an appeal was preferred challenging the order passed in the appeal of Rinku Kumari and the Appellate Tribunal exercising review jurisdiction, amended it’s own order passed in Appeal No. 578 of 2009. The review jurisdiction could have been exercised by the tribunal only in case it is vested with this jurisdiction - 3 - under the statute. The statute has not vested this power in the tribunal, to review it’s own order. The order passed by the Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 37 of 2008 dated 22.6.2009 and 17.8.2009 are completely illegal and without jurisdiction. No direction can be issued to the Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary to give effect to such illegal order. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. However, petitioner has liberty to challenge the order passed in the earlier appeal filed by Rinku Kumari vide Appeal No. 578 of 2009. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)