IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14771 of 2009 1. RANJEET KUMAR JHA S/O SAHDEO JHA VILL.- JHAKHRA PATAYILI, P.S.- SARAIRANJAN, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 2. ANU KUMARI D/O UMESH PRASAD ISHWAR VILL.- GURHMA, P.S. SARAIRANJAN, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 3. KUMARI RANJANA D/O MANBHARAN SAH VILL.- SIHMA BATHNA BUJURG, P.S. MUSHRIGHARARI, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 4. ANIL KUMAR PASWAN S/O HIRDYA NARAYAN PASWAN VILL.- MOHANPUR, P.S. SAMASTIPUR, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGSITRATE, SAMASTIPUR 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SAMASTIPUR 5. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SARAIRANJAN BLOCK, SAMASTIPUR 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, SARAIRANJAN, SAMASTIPUR 7. THE MUKHIYA MEMBER OF SUKHSUBIDHA COMMITTEE OF GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ SARAIRANJAN WEST, SAMASTIPUR 8. THE SECRETARY MEMBER OF SUKHSUBIDHA COMMITTEE OF GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ SARAIRANJAN WEST, SAMASTIPUR 9. THE HEAD MASTER, RAJKIYA PRATHMIK VIDYALAYA KALYANPUR, SAMASTIPUR 10. THE HEAD MASTER, UTKRAMIT MIDDLE SCHOOL SHITALPATTI, SAMASTIPUR ----------- 02/ 10.02.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing for the State. Petitioners have filed this application for quashing of the order dated 30.11.2008 passed by the District Magistrate, Samastipur cancelling the appointment of the petitioners on the post of Panchayat teachers. The cancellation order has been issued by the District Magistrate on the basis of a report submitted by Three Men Committee constituted by him for examining the irregularities in appointment of Panchayat teachers under Bihar Panchayat - 2 - Primary Teachers (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006. Petitioners’ case is that they were duly appointed by the Appointment Committee constituted Rule 9 of the 2006 Rules on different dates and also joined on the post in different schools in Gram Panchayat Raj Sarairanjan West. The B.D.O. made some illegal appointments without approval of the Appointment Committee against which some complaints were made before the District Magistrate by some aggrieved candidates. On receiving such complaint the District Magistrate constituted Three Men Committee to examine the complaint. Three Men Committee did not issue any show cause to the petitioners during enquiry and submitted a report, on the basis of such report petitioners’ appointment have been cancelled. Petitioners have assailed the order impugned passed by the District Magistrate and also entire process of enquiry. The impugned order and enquiry report has been challenged by the petitioners on the ground that in violation of rule of natural justice, enquiry report has been submitted and impugned cancellation order has been issued. - 3 - It has been submitted by the petitioners’ counsel that under 2006 Rules the District Magistrate of any district has not been vested with powers to issue any order relating to appointment, termination, transfer or any service conditions of the Panchayat/Prakhand/Nagar Teachers. Under Rule 18 of 2006 Rules the B.D.O. was vested with such powers. After amendment of 2006 Rules in 2008 such power has been vested in District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal. I find much substance in the submission made by the petitioners. The impugned order so far petitioners are concerned is quashed. Petitioners are directed to be reinstated on their respective posts in the concerned schools, they were earlier working, with all consequential benefits. This application is allowed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)