IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12094 of 2008 Rajesh Kumar, son of Sri Ram Deo Prasad, resident of village Khedali Bigha, P.O. Maldah, P.S.- Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura. ………….. Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2.The Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bailey Road, Patna 3.The Director, Education (Panchayat Shikshak), Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bailey Road, Patna 4.The Collector, Sheikhpura 5.The District Superintendent of Education-cum- Coordinator, Panchayat Shiksha, Sheikhpura 6.The Block Development Officer, Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura 7.The Block Education Officer, P.S. Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura 8.The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Maldah, P.S. Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura 9.The Panchayat Sevak-cum-Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Maldah, P.S. Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura. …………. Respondents ---------------------------------- 3. 14/11/2011 Impugned order in this writ application is an order of the District Superintendent of Education, Sheikhpura contained in Memo No.311 dated 7.3.2008, by which he has directed the Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary of the concerned Panchayat to cancel the appointment of the petitioner on the charge that the petitioner had obtained appointment by impersonation and by producing certificates of another person. Clearly, this order has been passed after the Bihar Panchayat Prarambhik Shikshak 2 (Niyojan Avam Seva Sart) Niyamvali, 2006 came into force governing the appointment, service conditions and other matters in respect of Panchayat Teachers. The Rules, which is statutory one, does not empower the District Superintendent of Education to interfere in the matter of appointment and/or otherwise service conditions of Panchayat Teachers. The impugned order is therefore without jurisdiction and the same is accordingly quashed. The respondents authorities are directed to transmit the entire records concerning the appointment of the petitioner, together with any complaint, enquiry report etc., to the concerned Appellate Authority constituted in terms of 2008 amendment in the Rules, positively within one month from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. On receipt of the records, the Appellate Authority shall issue notice to all the parties, including the intervener, shall call for the original records, shall also direct the petitioner to physically appear before it, shall also allow other parties to produce other documents, as they may feel necessary, 3 to show that the petitioner had impersonated his brother, who is said to have become traceless long before, shall examine in detail the allegation that the petitioner is using the certificates of his traceless brother for getting employment, shall also examine in detail the allegation of the intervener that both Rajesh Kumar (Petitioner) and Braj Kishore Prasad are one and the same person and has appeared in different Institutions with different names and different dates of birth and has obtained certificates. The Appellate Authority shall also examine as to whether the claim of the petitioner, on the other hand, is correct that both are different persons and they were own brothers and Braj Kishore Prasad has become traceless long back. The Appellate Authority shall decide the matter on merits preferably within the time limit fixed under the Rules for disposal of such matters. Till final decision is taken by the Appellate Authority in the matter, status quo as of today shall be maintained. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)