IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17415 of 2009 1. ANUP KUMAR SINGH S/O VIKRMA SINGH R/O VILL.- MANEY, GRAM PANCHAYAT- MANEY, P.S.- EKMA, DISTT.- SARAN AT CHAPRA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYATI RAJ DEPTT., BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR PANCHAYATI RAJ, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SARAN 4. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SARAN, CHAPRA 5. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER EKMA 6. THE SARPANCH GRAM KACHAHARI, MANEY, SARAN 7. DWARIKA PRASAD YADAVA S/O BISHWANATH PRASAD R/O VILL.- NAUTAN, EKMA, DISTT.- SARAN AT CHAPRA ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Awadhesh kr. Mishra, Adv., Mr. Arun Kumar Mandal, Adv. Mr. Anand Kr. Mishra, Adv., Mr. C.B. Upadhayay, Adv, Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv . For the State:- Mr. Santosh Kr. Singh, Adv. --------------- 2. 17.2.2010 Heard learned counsel of the petitioner and the State. The issue relates to the equivalence of ‘Madhyama’ to ‘Matriculate’ for purposes of appointment as Secretary, Gram Kachahari. As a matriculate the petitioner came to be selected and appointed on 26.11.2007. Subsequently, this Court relying on certain Government notifications held that ‘Madhyama’ was equivalent to ‘Matriculate’ for appointment in Government service leading to amendment of the rules of appointment by the authorities on 5.1.2009 with retrospective effect from 31.1.2008. In pursuance thereto the petitioner is sought to be terminated by order dated 15.10.2009, in preference to another holding the qualification of ‘Madhyama’. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon an order of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6762 of 2009 and 2 analogous cases as also another order of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 13836 of 2009. Learned counsel for the State has no objection if this writ application is disposed off in similar terms with directions to the Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayat Raj to re- decide the issue of termination of the petitioner after hearing all considered including respondent no. 7, within a maximum period of three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, during which time period the impugned order of termination of the petitioner shall remain in abeyance to finaly merge with the fresh order that may be passed by the Principal Secretary. It shall also be open for the petitioner to raise any further issues before the principal Secretary, if so advised. This Court considers the order of the present nature as most appropriate as otherwise in the facts and circumstances of the case it would have required the impugned order to be stayed, notices to be issued to the private respondents when the writ application would have come up for admission years later as this Court today is hearing writ applications for admission of the years 2003-04. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)