IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1202 of 2010 1. RANJU SINGH W/O HARENDRA NATH SINGH R/O VILL.- DHUPHAGAR, P.S.- KHYRA, DISTT.- SARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE COMMISSIONER SARAN DIVISION, SARAN 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SARAN, CHAPRA 6. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION SARAN, CHAPRA 7. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER NAGRA (SARAN) 8. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ DUMARI, P.S.- NAGRA, DISTT.- SARAN 9. MANJU KUMARI W/O HARENDRA NATH SINGH R/O VILL.- DHUPNAGAR, P.S.- KHYRA, DISTT.- SARAN ----------- 2 25.6.2010 Petitioner had applied for appointment to the post of Panchayat Teacher under Gram Panchayat Raj Dumri, Block Nagra, District- Saran. There were more than two posts available for appointment. In the eligibility criteria , the minimum eligibility educational qualification was stipulated as Intermediate or equivalent with minimum 45% marks. Petitioner had passed his matriculation examination (Madhyama) in the year 2003. The said examination was conducted by Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna. He thereafter passed Up-Shastri examination conducted by Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga University in the year 2005, which is alleged to be equivalent to Intermediate. In the examination for Up-Shastri as per University Examination bye laws , petitioner had to appear in ten papers of marks 100 each . Thus totaling 1000 marks. The mark-sheet is appended as Annexure 2, which shows that the petitioner had scored 679 marks out - 2 - of 1000 marks. Thus, the percentage obtained by the petitioner is 67.9%. When the merit list was prepared, petitioner was placed at serial no. 36 in order of merit showing that he had scored 601 marks out of 900 marks and as such his percentage was shown at 66.77. Petitioner was thus not considered meritorious for appointment and appointment letters, inter alia, to one Mina Kumari and Manju Kumari were issued , who had scored 67.77% and 67.22% respectively. Petitioner’s assertion is that he had scored 679 marks out of 1000 marks, which is more than these two candidates. The mistake committed by the Selection Committee was that they took the marks of first nine subjects leaving tenth subject in which petitioner had scored 78 marks and thus calculated the percentage. The sum total of first nine subjects comes to 601 with tenth paper totaling to 78. This could not be done. Prima facie, what is submitted appears to be correct but as pointed out by the learned counsel for the State , the petitioner has remedy under Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers(Employment and Service Condition) Rules,2006 wherein in terms of Rule 18 a statutory appellate authority has been created for deciding such issues including validity and invalidity of appointment or non appointment. Petitioner must, in view of this Court, first approach the appellate authority, exhaust alternative remedy and then come to this Court. Petitioner would be at liberty to impugn the appointments of two aforesaid candidates before the appellate tribunal, who would consider the matter on merit after hearing the parties in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of appeal. - 3 - With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)