IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17179 of 2010 1. Md. Tauhid Alam S/O Md. Phakaruddin R/O Vill. + P.O.- Jiyanganj, Piparatola, Marlopa, Distt.- Purnia, At Present Working In Middle School, Narayanpur 2. Rudal Prasad S/O Sri Parshuram Prasad R/O Vill. + P.O.- Navatan Bazar, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School, Navatan 3. Md. Mohiuddin S/O Md. Saffi R/O Vill. + P.O.- Kabirpur, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School Ramgard 4. Shani Bharti S/O Sri Narendra Bharti R/O Vill. + P.O.- Kanhauli, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School, Lilpur 5. Ram Kumar Ojha S/O Sri Baijnath Ojha R/O Vill. + P.O.- Punak Bujurg, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School, Shahpur 6. Laxmina Devi W/O Sri Satish Prasad R/O Vill. + P.O.- Kabirpur, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School, Navatan 7. Kumari Asha Rani C/O Ramaji Gupta, R/O Vill.+Post- Thana Road Mairawa, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School, Kilpur-1 8. Mamata Kumari C/O Balamukund Mishra R/O Vill. + Post- Kishanpura Mishrauli, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School, Narayanpur 9. Shaukat Alli S/O Ali Akhatar Ansari R/O Vill. + Post- Tilamapur, Shahapur, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School Khalawa 10. Subhawati Sah S/O Sri Ramchandra Prasad R/O Vill. + Post- Shahapur Nautan, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School, Pratappur 11. Md. Kalim S/O Neshaar Ahamad R/O Vill. + P.O.- Parasiya Bujurg, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School, Pratappur 12. Anita Singh W/O Sri Manindra Prasad R/O Vill. + Post- Anugrah Nagar Mairwa, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Middle School, Pratapapur 13. Chandrabhushan Tripathi S/O Sri Shiv Prasad Tiwari R/O Vill. + Post- Mairwa, Langarapura, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Navatan 14. Mursarat Jaha W/O Paravej Alam R/O Vill. + Post- Sisauna, Jokihat, Distt.- Arariya, At Present Working In Middle School, Ragard 15. Kumari Suganti Devi W/O Mukesh Kumar Ram R/O Vill. + Post- Tilamapur, Shahpur, Distt.- Siwan, At Present Working In Upgraded Middle School, Semara Bujurg Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. Of 2 Bihar, Patna 3. The District Magistrate, Siwan 4. The District Superintendent Of Education, Siwan 5. The Block Development Officer, Nautan, Distt.- Siwan 6. The Block Education Officer, Nautan, Distt.- Siwan 7. The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna ---------------------------------- 7 13.12.2011 Petitioners have challenged the various orders of the respondents, as contained in Annexure-1, 2 and 3. It appears that, in view of the letter of the Department dated 31.08.2010, as contained in Annexure-1, directions were issued by Annexure-2 and 3 to cancel the appointment of all those persons whose appointment letters had been issued subsequent to the dates fixed in the said letter dated 31.08.2010. Appointment letters of the petitioners appointing them as Block Teachers in various schools were issued on 14.08.2010, vide Annexure-10. The letter of the Government dated 31.08.2010, as contained in Annexure-1, has fixed-up the cut-off date for issue of appointment letter of a Block Teacher as 12.08.2010. Thus, the appointment letters of the petitioners were issued two days after the cut-off date. In 3 the circumstances, on the basis of the instructions of the higher authorities, the Block Development Officer through letter dated 22.09.2010, as contained in Annexure- 4, held appointment letters of the petitioners as invalid and cancelled them. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the process for appointment had been initiated long back and due to unforeseeable reasons there was a little delay in issue of actual appointment letters although counselling had been held by the cut-off date. Hence, he submits that, only because formal letters were issued later on, the appointment of the petitioners should not have been held to be illegal and the orders should not have been cancelled by the respondents. A counter affidavit has been filed in this case. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that, in view of Annexure-1, the appointments of the petitioners have been cancelled on the ground that the letters have been issued two days after the cut-off date. If an advertisement is published, 4 applications are invited and process for appointment on public posts is undertaken, the same has to be completed in terms of the advertisement and only for cogent reasons and compelling circumstances the process can be cancelled. Admittedly, the process for appointment of the petitioners had started long back. Hence, only because there was a delay of two days in issue of appointment letters to the petitioners, it was not proper for the respondents to cancel the same. The Department through letter dated 31.08.2010, as contained in Annexure-1, has fixed up cut-off date for issue of appointment letters without fixing any cut- off date for initiation of process of appointment, which is apparently unreasonable. There should have been first restrained on fresh initiation of process for appointment then only directions could be issued to complete the process already started, within a fixed time. It was possible that, in particular cases there could be various reasons for non-completion of the process within time. Hence, in the opinion of this Court, there could not be a 5 blanket ban on issue of appointment letters, if the process had been initiated within time and long back. If at all the respondents found that there was abnormal delay in completion of process for appointment in particular cases, they could examine the matter and issue specific directions for cancelling the whole process on any reasonable ground, but a blanket ban imposed by Annexure-1 was clearly unreasonable. In the circumstances, this writ application is allowed. The order of cancellation of appointment of the petitioners is quashed. The respondents are directed to act upon the appointment letters issued to the petitioners and to reinstate them forthwith with all consequential benefits. Arvind/ ( J.N. Singh, J.)