IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13696 of 2010 1. ANITA KUMARI D/O AMAR NATH PANDEY, R/O BARASATH PO- KARSAR, PS- NAWANAGER, DISTT- BUXAR, BIHAR 2. ANJU KUMARI W/O DHARMENDRA KUMAR SINGH R/O SEWAI TOLA PO- PARMANPUR, PS- NAWANAGAR, DISTT- BUXAR, BIHAR 3. KUNTI KUMARI W/O ARUN KUMAR SINGH R/O SEWAI TOLA PO- PARMANPUR, PS- NAWANAGER, DISTT- BUXAR, BIHAR 4. SHAKUNTALA UPADHAYAY W/O RAMESHWAR DUBEY R/O VILL- DASIAW PO- KESHATH, PS- NAWANAGER, DISTT- BUXAR, BIHAR------------------------PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIOKNER & SECY. HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT, BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE COLLECTOR, BUXAR 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, BUXAR 4. THE B.D.O. NAWANAGER, PS- NAWANAGAR, DISTT- BUXAR 5. THE GRAM PANCHAYAT PARMANPUR PO- PARMANPUR PS- NAWANAGAR DISTT- BUXAR THROUGH ITS MUKHIYA ANIL KUMAR CHOUBEY S/O ONKAR NATH CHOUBEY R/O PO- PARMANPUR, PS- NAWANAGAR, DISTT- BUXAR. 6. THE PANCHAYAT SECY. GRAM PANCHAYAT PARMANPUR, PO- PARMANPUR, PS- NAWANAGAR, DISTT- BUXAR----RESPONDENTS ----------- 2 30.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. This writ application is against the order passed by the appellate tribunal, Buxar. Appeal was by these petitioners against the final order of their removal passed by the Block Development Officer who found their appointments not to be inconsonance with the settled guidelines issued in this regard. Many infirmities were found and therefore the order of removal came to be passed. Tribunal had occasion to reconsider the matter afresh in the background in which their removal was effected. After looking into all the records and considering the submissions the tribunal has come to a considered opinion that all has not been well in terms of selection process which has been effected by the selection committee and there are glaring infirmities which has - 2 - emerged from the documents produced before the tribunal. Submission on behalf of the petitioners is that the appellate tribunal without assigning any reason proceeded to hold that there were irregularities in the appointment. Such submission now has no merit specially in the background that this Court is not exercising any power under the original side but is exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to broadly test the basic correctness or otherwise of the decision and whether the decision has been rendered within the parameter of law with no glaring infirmities. Reappraisal of evidence and rewriting of order is not the ambit and scope of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Since no major and legal infirmity having been pointed out with the reasonings as such, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said order. It may also be recorded that an intervenor petition has been filed wherein many a things have been alleged or stated which was the background under which the order of removal had to be passed. But this Court is not swayed by statements as the intervenor petition has not been allowed. This writ application has no merit and it is dismissed. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)