IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16689 of 2009 1. SATYA NARAYAN RAM S/O LATE MISHREE RAM R/OVILL KURUM, P.S.KADWA(BALIA BELONE), DISTT- KATIHAR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COLLECTOR KATIHAR, DISTT- KATIHAR 3. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER KATIHAR 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION KATIHAR 5. THE DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT TRIBUNAL KATIHAR 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, KADWA, DISTT- KATIHAR 7. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER KADWA, DISTT- KATIHAR 8. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ BIJHAARA, BLOCK KADWA, DISTT- KATIHAR 9. THE CHAIRMAN SELECTION COMMITTEE, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ BIJARA BLOCK KADWA, DISTT KATIHAR 10. ASHOK KUMAR ROY S/O DINESH CHANDRA ROY R/OVILL BIJHARA, P.S.KADWA(BALIA BELONE)DISTT- KATIHAR 11. SURESH ROY S/O MAHENDRA ROY R/O VILL BIJHARA, P.S. KADWA(BALIA BELONE)DISTT- KATIHAR ----------- 4 14/12/2010 There is some merit in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by the Block Development Officer was after the notification dated 25.08.2008 by virtue of which power of appeal came to vest in the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority. Proper thing for the Block - 2 - Development Officer would have been to transfer the matter to the Appellate Authority instead of deciding the matter himself since Rule has undergone a change and the earlier direction of the Court could not be complied with due to time gap between the date of decision dated 7.2.2009 and the date of notification bringing about change in the Rule. Irrespective of merits of contentions of the two parties, this Court is of the opinion that prejudice has been caused to both sides in the manner in which the matter has come to be dealt with by the Authority at two different times when two different orders had to be passed, both of which became subject matter of challenge in the two writ applications. Since Appellate Authority is the first forum for adjudication of facts, the Court decides to quash even the impugned order dated 10.11.2009 contained in annexure-3 and remits the matter back to the Appellate Authority, Katihar who shall issue notice to both parties i.e. the present petitioner, namely, Satya Narayan Ram and the private respondents Kishore Kumar Roy, who is petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 10868 of 2009 and Suresh - 3 - Roy who were supposed to be the applicants before the Authorities for appointment. The Authority will thereafter render its opinion on the dispute between the parties. So far as one Ashok Kumar Roy is concerned, who has been made party respondent no. 10 in this case, he shows complete ignorance about his existence which has some reflection on the dispute which too will be looked into by the Appellate Authority because it has some significance for the dispute in question. This writ application is disposed of with the direction aforesaid. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)