IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.994 of 2008 Lorik Yadav, S/O Sri Awadh Yadav, resident of village + P.O. Khajedih, P.S. Ladaniya, District Madhubani…………………………………..….Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through its Commissioner- cum-Secretary to Govt. in the Department of Human Resources Development, New Secretariat Building Bihar, Patna. 2. The District Magistrate, Madhubani, Bihar. 3. The District Education Officer, Madhubani, Bihar 4. The District Education Superintendent, Madhubani, 5. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Madhubani, 6. The Block Development Officer, Ladaniya, P.O. + P.S. Ladaniya, under the District of Madhubani, Bihar 7. The Block Education Extension Officer, under the District of Madhubani, Bihar. 8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Raj Khoja under the District of Madhubani. 9. The Secretary of Gram Panchayat, Raj Khoja District Madhubani……………………………………………Respondents ----------- 2 31.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by an order issued by the respondent-Block Development Officer dated 29.11.2007 by which, while cancelling appointment of the petitioner, the Mukhiya / Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Raj Khota has been directed to ensure joining of one Chandeshwar Sah on the post of Panchayat Teacher. This letter does not show that any reason was assigned nor this petitioner was heard in the matter. Aggrieved by the said 2 order, petitioner filed an appeal before the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Madhubani which was registered as Case No.16 of 2006. The same remained pending and only by order dated 07.05.2010, the same has been dismissed on the ground that the order had been passed in the matter by the B.D.O. in 2007 and communicated through the said letter dated 29.11.2007(Annexure-6), when he had the jurisdiction to pass orders in terms of unamended Rule 18 of the Rules. Prima facie, the order of the B.D.O. is in violation of the Principles of Natural Justice and without any consideration of the matter on merits. In the circumstance, the appellate authority should have entertained the appeal of the petitioner on merits and should have decided the same in the light of the relevant records including the proceedings of Aam Sabha produced by the petitioner on the records of the case. Therefore, this matter is remitted back to the Appellate Authority, Madhubani with a direction to reopen Case No.16 of 2006 of the petitioner, issue notice to necessary parties, call for the original records, and decide the 3 same on merits without feeling any impediment from the said order of the B.D.O. in the matter of consideration of the appeal on its on merits, within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)