IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15300 of 2010 1. LAXMI KUMARI W/O RAMESH KUMAR R/O VILL RAHATPUR, P.O.RAM NAGAR, P.S.SURYAGARHA, BLOCK- PIPARIA, DISTT-LAKHISARAI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE LAKHISARAI 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION LAKHISARAI 4. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER PIPARIA, DISTT-LAKHISARAI 5. THE MUKHIYA , GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ SAIDPURA, BLOCK-PIPARIA, DISTT-LAKHISARAI 6. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ SAIDPURA, BLOCK-PIPARIA, DISTT-LAKHISARAI 7. THE MEMBER , DISTRICT TEACHER'S APPOINTMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY LAKHISARAI ----------- 02. 29.4.2011 Obviously lack of expertise and exposure to judicial work, which is lacking in the Member of District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, is visible on the various orders which have been brought on record by the petitioner. Annexure-2 is an order dated 2.3.2009 directing the Panchayat secretary to hold a counselling of the petitioner. How such an order or direction could be given even without adjudication on the issue is not understood. That is the first infirmity which the Court notices. Then there is an order contained in Annexure-6, which is dated 9.7.2009. In this order merit list was quashed and a direction was given not to proceed with the matter. Thereafter a third order, which is Annexure-7, dated 12.8.2009 has been passed which, according to the petitioner, is a recall of the earlier order dated 9.7.2009 and dismissal of the case of the 2 petitioner giving liberty to Panchayat to proceed with the appointment/selection. The Court wanted to express its opinion in the conduct of such proceeding by the concerned Member but keeping the dignity of the tribunal and the quasi judicial authority, the Court only observes that the Member has a lot of training and weeding to be done to understand the responsibility in which he has been placed. He is no longer an administrative authority who is exercising powers by recording his opinions in a file. He was an officer of the State Government before his appointment but now is a Member of the appellate authority. In a judicial order adjudication is yet another cup of tea. In the totality, therefore, both Annexures 6 and 7 are quashed. Matter is remitted back to the appellate authority that he shall now hear the petitioner again, issue notice to the concerned respondent as well and after verifying the records will pass a clear and categorical order irrespective of the order he has passed in the past without being influenced by such orders because per say this Court expresses unhappiness in the manner in which this proceeding has been conducted. Writ is allowed. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)