IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7939 of 2010 MAHSHARI TALAT JAHAN, W/O SHAMSHAD ALAM, R/O VILLAGE - BELWA, P.O.-BELWA, P.S. & DISTRICT- KISHANGANJ. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY , HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY CUM DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION,KISHANGANJ. 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,KISHANGANJ. 5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER,KISHANGANJ. 6. THE DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY,KISHANGANJ. 7. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER,KISHANGANJ. 8. THE MUKHIA, GRAM PANCHAYAT,BELWA,P.S.- KISHANGANJ,DISTRICT-KISHANGANJ. 9. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT,BELWA, P.S.-KISHANGANJ,DISTRICT- KISHANGANJ. With CWJC No.7965 of 2010 AKHTERA BEGAM W/O MD. MAHBOOB ALAM R/O VILL.- KASHIPUR, P.O. BELWA, P.S. & DISTT.- KISHANGANJ Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY CUM DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, KISHANGANJ 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KISHANGANJ 5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, KISHANGANJ 6. THE DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KISHANGANJ 7. THE MUKHIA, GRAM PANCHAYAT, BELWA, P.S.- KISHANGANJ, DISTT.- KISHANGANJ 8. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT, BELWA, P.S.- KISHANGANJ, DISTT.- KISHANGANJ ----------- For the petitioners : Mr. Radha Mohan Singh. For the State : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, AC to SC 16 2 _____ 02. 03.2.2011 Both the writ applications are being disposed of by a common order since they arise from a common order which has been passed by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Kisanganj in Case no. 284 of 2009, disposed of on 3.6.2009. By virtue of this order the appointments made of eight Panchayat teachers have been annulled on the ground that proper procedure with regard to selection had not been followed by ignoring the laid down rules as well as the procedure in this regard. Learned counsel for the petitioners in both the cases submits that there is an error in the finding given by the appellate authority inasmuch as there was nothing to indicate that only such persons will be entertained in counselling provided the persons above them do not turn up. This does not reflect the actual state of affairs. In the opinion of the Court, that does not change the nature of the finding or the conclusion reached by the appellate authority because if the order is read as a whole it clearly establishes that effort was made by the authorities involved with the selection process to oust and eliminate persons who were rightful claimants to accommodate a limited number of persons who had to be appointed. If a farcical exercise for selection to a public post is carried out in such a manner, then the tribunal has committed no wrong by setting aside the appointments. This 3 Court finds no infirmity to interfere with the finding as a whole. There is no merit in the matter. Both the writ applications are dismissed. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)