IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1083 of 2010 1. ARBIND KUMAR THAKUR S/O KANIK LAL THAKUR R/O VILL- KUSHA, P.S- SHAHEPUR KAMAL, DISTT- BEGUSARAI 2. KIRAN KUMARI D/O SRI JAGDISH YADAV, W/O SUMAN KUMAR RAI R/O VILL-= UTTAR DHAMAN, P.OST- UTTAR DHAMAN, PS- PATORI, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SECRETARY DEPARTMENT, HUMAN RESOURCES OF GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT, OF PRIMARY EDUCATION , GOVT. OF BIHAR 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KHAGARIA 4. THE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, KHAGARIA 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, KHAGARIA 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ALAULI, DISTT- KHAGARIA 7. THE HEAD MASTER, null GOVT. MIDDLE SCHOOL, BLOCK ALLAULI, P.S- ALLOULI, DISTT- KHAGARIA 8. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, MIDDLE SCHOOL, BLOCK- ALLAULI,P.S- ALLOULI, DISTT- KHAGARIA 9. BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSTION OFFICER, BLOCK ALLOULI, DISTT- KHAGARIA ----------- 02 21.06.2010 The petitioners claim that they were regularly appointed as Block Teachers from the panel and their joining is dated 07.12.2007. They are still working. They are not being paid their wages nor their cases have been sent to the department for approving their services. As apparent from Annexure-12, the stand of the State would be that the panel that was made was valid up to 30.11.2007. The entire block was flood affected and all officials were involved in flood relief work for a considerable period. Ultimately, the decision was taken from the panel to appoint the petitioner on 29.11.2007 and appointment letters were issued on 06.12.2007, pursuant to which petitioners joined on 07.12.2007. A view has been taken that appointment letters were - 2 - issued after the panel stood dissolved with effect from 30.11.2007. In my view, if this is the only ground for not paying the petitioners their salaries and seeking for approval for their services then it is misconceived. The selection was completed on 29.11.2007. It had got delayed because of the devastating floods in that area. The appointment letter was only issued subsequently. Looking it from a different view, once selection was made on 29.11.2007, the panel had served its purpose and stood dissolved. Issuing appointment letters subsequent thereto cannot be said wrong or illegal in any manner. Thus, if this be the only ground then it is a misconceived ground to deprive the petitioner to their wages and to their right to get approval in service. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents to reconsider the matter in view of the findings as recorded above and take a decision appropriate to the facts of the case within a period of one month of filing of a representation along with a copy of order of this Court before the Block Education Officer concerned. The writ petition stands disposed of. Trivedi (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)