IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5984 of 2008 SUMAN SHARMA, S/O LAKSHUMAN SHARMA, R/O VILLAGE-KHARIA JIVA BIGHA, P.S.-KUTUMBA, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD. ……………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE SECRETARY, PRIMARY AND ADULT EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, AURANGABAD. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, AURANGABAD. 5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, AURANGABAD. 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER KUTUMBA, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD. 7. SANJAY KUMAR MEHTA, S/O NOT KNOWN, PANCHAYAT TEACHER OF PRIMARY SCHOOL, BODI BIGAHA, (KARMA BASANTPUR), P.S.- AMBA KUTUMBA, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD. 8. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT KARMA BASANTPUR, P.S.-AMBA KUTUMBA, DISTRICT- AURANGABAD. 9. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT KARMA BASANTPUR, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD. ……………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 6 01.08.2011 Through I.A. No.1556 of 2010 the impugned office order dated 07.02.2008 of the Block Education Extension Officer has been brought on record as Annexure-9 by which the services of as many as 31 Prakhand Teachers have been cancelled on the basis of some inquiry report of the S.D.O., Aurangabad received through letter no.98 dated 10.01.2008 and in view of memo of the Deputy Development Commissioner, Aurangabad dated 22.01.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged this order precisely on the 2 ground that before cancellation of engagements neither any notice was issued to the petitioner to show cause nor he was given any opportunity to be heard in defence of validity of his appointment. He also submits that some inquiry was held behind his back which was also not made known to the petitioner and he was not called upon to participate in the same. The order does not show that any such requirement of law was complied with by the Deputy Development Commissioner who passed orders in exercising of his powers under the Rules. Hence, apparently, the order suffers from violation of Principles of Natural Justice. In the circumstances, the order is quashed so far as petitioner is concerned. However, on account of quashing of the order, the so-called inquiry against the engagement of the petitioner and others revives. Hence, the Deputy Development Commissioner is directed to transmit the entire records in respect of the engagement of the petitioner, along with the inquiry report submitted by the S.D.O. through said letter dated 10.01.2008, to the statutory 3 Appellate Authority constituted under the Rules in terms of the 2008 amendments, positively within one months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. On receipt of the records, the Appellate Authority shall issue notice to the respective parties giving them opportunity to be heard, shall call for the original records from the concerned Panchayat, if necessary, and shall decide the matter positively within two months from the date of receipt of the records from the office of the Deputy Development Commissioner. Learned counsels appearing for the parties agree that the respondent no.7 has been added as party by mistake. He is Panchayt Teacher and has nothing to do with the engagement or cancellation of the petitioner. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Arvind/ ( J.N. Singh, J.)