IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.578 of 2011 Bharti d/o Sri Jagdish Das, resident Auliabad, P.O. Jhandapur, District- Bhagalpur. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through Sri Anjani Kumar Singh, Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. Sri Ashutosh, the Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Sri Madhusudan Paswan, the District Education Officer, Bhagalpur. 4. Sri Amrika Prasad, the District Superintendent of Education, Bhagalpur. 5. Sri Jago Das, the Block Development Officer, Block, Bihpur, District Bhagalpur. 6. Sri Dinesh Kumar Mahto, the Blok Education Extension Officer, Block Bihpur, District- Bhagalpur. 7. Sri Shikari Ram s/o Sri Lakhmi Ram, the Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Marba East, Block Bihpur, District- Bhagalpur. 8. Sri Kamal Kishore, the Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Marba East, Block Bihpur, District- Bhagalpur. ----------- 3 6.7.2011 The matter relates to appointment of Panchayat Teacher. One Lucy Bharti was appointed as a Panchayat Teacher. The petitioner being aggrieved had moved the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal. The appellate tribunal ,after hearing the parties, set aside the selection and appointment of Lucy Bharti and the Panchayat concerned was directed to take a decision afresh from the panel , as prepared. Accordingly, Panchayat was required to cancel the appointment of said Lucy Bharti. That having not been done and the petitioner being one of the interested candidate filed a writ application being CWJC No.13463 of 2010 for a direction to the Panchayat to obey the order of tribunal. The writ application was allowed by this Court after hearing the parties and the Panchayat 2 was directed to implement the order of tribunal immediately. The result was that the petitioner now had a fair chance of being selected because the petitioner was no.3 in the panel, above Lucy Bharti. To the surprise of the petitioner, the petitioner learnt that Lucy Bharti was once again appointed,having earlier been terminated pursuant to the order of this Court for implementation of the order of the tribunal. This contempt application was filed complaining that the order of this Court had been disobeyed. A show cause was filed by Mukhiya in a belligerent attitude, who made initial appointment, which was set aside. The stand taken by the said Mukhiya is that pursuant to the orders of this Court and the tribunal, the appointment of Lucy Bharti was cancelled. The panel was taken up for reconsideration .The first empanelled candidate refused to take the appointment. The second empanelled candidate has already been appointed else where. So far as petitioner, who was third is concerned , it has been alleged that she was noticed to appear for counseling and appointment but she did not turn up and as such fourth being Lucy Bharti she was re-appointed . To say the least, the Court is not impressed. Upon query from Mukhiya as to how the petitioner was noticed, Mukhiya took a very fair stand that it was sent under certificate of posting. It is not understandable why a person, who has litigated in this Court and succeeded would ignore to eat the fruits of efforts. What is apparent is that the orders of this Court and the tribunal are for removal of Lucy Bharti but that was not done and as such by 3 adopting deceitful means he has been brought back. It is not in dispute that in the panel the petitioner was above Lucy Bharti. As the petitioner’s counsel is present and so is the Mukhiya present, I direct that petitioner would personally appear before the Panchayat Secretary within fortnight, who would check her credential and having been found above the Lucy Bharti, would cancel the appointment of Lucy Bharti and appoint the petitioner which was the effect of the order of the tribunal and this Court earlier. In view of the fact that in the democratic election held, people have taken their revenge on this Mukhiya by not electing him again, I do not propose to take any further punitive action though his conduct is deplorable. With the aforesaid observations and direction these proceedings are thus discharged. Singh ( Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)