IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5561 of 2009 Shailesh Kumar Singh & Ors . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- 5. 14.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the State and for the Staff Selection Commission. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they are trained Dalpaties in the District of Rohtas. Strong reliance is placed on a communication dated 20.9.2008 from the District Panchayat Raj Officer at Rohtas addressed to the Director, Panchayati Raj stating that there were 121 vacancies for the posts of Dalpaties and 20 Dalpaties were available for consideration. Directions were therefore sought in that background for appointment. Learned counsel submits that if vacancies and eligible candidates are both available there can be no justification for not filling up the posts. The additional ground urged from Annexure-B to the counter affidavit of the Circle Officer, Sasaram, is that by letter dated 8.7.2008 the District Magistrate has queried from the Director, Panchayati Raj with regard to the appointments. It refers to the letter dated 11.6.2008 and the directions contained in the letter dated 20.8.1998, that there were 531 sanctioned posts of Panchayat Sewaks which were required to be filled 2 up, seeking directions for the course to be adopted. Counsel for the State is unable to assist the Court beyond what is mentioned in the counter affidavit. The Court does not have the benefit of what stand the Director, Panchayati Raj, proposes to take and whether he has replied to the District Magistrate. This administrative lapse has generated this litigation, leaving the Court also in a state of uncertainty for lack of proper assistance to adjudicate the matter. It was left to the counsel for the Commission to inform the Court that subsequently the post of Panchayat Sewak has been abolished and replaced by the Panchayat Secretary. Rules and regulations for appointments of Panchayat Secretary have been framed. He submits that there are certain orders of this Court in 2009(4) PLJR 569 in this regard. The Director, Panchayati Raj having failed to render proper assistance to this Court, the following order is passed. Let the petitioners appear before the Director, Panchayati Raj along with the present order. The Director shall be obliged to give them a personal and/or representative hearing. If the Director were to opine that the petitioners are not entitled to relief, he shall furnish them full materials on which he proposes 3 to deny relief. The petitioners shall be given reasonable time to answer the same whereafter the Director shall pass a reasoned and speaking order. The judgment of the Court in 2009(4) PLJR 569, needless to state has to be examined by the Director. Let this order be complied with in its entirety by the Director, Panchayati Raj within a maximum period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before him, provided the petitioners fully co-operate. ] The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)