IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11700 of 2011 1. Birendra Singh S/O Satnarayan Singh R/O Vill.- Khalaspur (Gangapur), P.O- Sadokhar, P.S.- Chenari, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Human Resource And Development Department, Bihar, Patna 2. The Director Null Primary Education, Bihar , Patna 3. The District Teachers Employement Appellate Authority through its President Rohtas at Sasaram 4. The District Magistrate Rohtas at Sasaram 5. The Education Officer Rohtas at Sasaram 6. The District Superintendent Of Education Rohtas at Sasaram 7. The Block Education Extension Officer Chenari, Rohtas 8. Rajbansh Paswan, Mukhia Ughani, P.S.- Chenari, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram 9. The Panchayat Secretary Ughani, P.S.- Chenari, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram 10. Basidhar Tiwari S/O Late Ramsakal Tiwari R/O Vill.- Urda, P.S.- Chenari, Distt.- Rohtas As Sasaram 11. Jaglal Singhyadav S/O Late Kasi Singh R/O Vill.- Nonia Bigha, P.S.- Arwal, Distt.- Arwal ---------------------------------- For the petitioner: Mr. Prabhakar Singh, Advocate For the State: Mr. JC to GA-6 For Respondent No.10: Mr. R.K.Pandey, Advocate ----------------------------------- 5. 8.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsels for the State and for the private respondent no. 10. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 27.6.2011 passed in case No. 140/2010 by the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Rohtas at Sasaram by which he has refused to review the earlier order dated 2.2.2011 and also the earlier order dated 2.2.2011 by which the services of the petitioner as Panchayat Teacher has been cancelled and direction has been issued to the 2 respondent-Gram Panchayat to appoint the respondent no. 10 on the said post. The main point raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the earlier order dated 2.2.2011 was passed by the Appellate Authority without the petitioner being made a party or without issuing any notice or giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in the matter. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the order dated 2.2.2011 passed by the Appellate Authority is illegal being in violation of the principles of natural justice. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also sought to assail the order dated 27.6.2011 passed on a review application filed by him. However, learned counsel was unable to show any provision under which any power of review has been conferred upon the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Rohtas at Sasaram. For the said reasons this Court finds that the order dated 27.6.2011 of the Appellate Authority stating that it has no power of review is correct and the same is not required to be interfered with. However, learned counsel for the respondent no. 10 admits that the petitioner was neither made a party nor any notices were issued or served upon him when the earlier order dated 2.2.2011 was passed by the District Teacher 3 Employment Appellate Authority cancelling the appointment of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the order dated 2.2.2011 is evidently in violation of the principles of natural justice and must go. It is accordingly quashed. The writ application is thus allowed and the matter is remitted to the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Rohtas at Sasaram to consider and dispose of case No. 140/2010 afresh in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the respondents. No further notice however, is required to be issued to the petitioner and respondent no. 10. They are directed to appear before the Appellate Authority on 28th November, 2011 which shall thereafter proceed in the matter expeditiously and after hearing the parties, including the Gram Panchayat which may be duly noticed again in the matter, finally dispose of the case within a period of four months from today. S.Pandey (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)