IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14900 of 2009 Young Bangloo, son of Md. Hasan, resident of village Bhaluhai, P.O. Manjhela, P.S. Kauwakol, District Nawada … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. Project Director, Sarwa Shiksha Abhiyan, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Nawadah 5. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Nawadah 6. The District Superintendent of Education cum District Programme Coordinator, Sarwa Shiksha Abhiyan, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 7. The Sub-divisional Education Officer, Nawadah 8. The Pramukh, Kauwakol Panchayat Samiti cum Chairman Prakhand Shikshak Selection Committee, Kauwakol, Nawadah 9. The Block Education Extension Officer cum Secretary Prakhand Shikshak Selection Committee, Kauwakol, Nawadah 10. The Block Development Officer, Kauwakol Nawadah cum Member Selection Committee, Kauwakol, Nawadah … Respondents with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8643 of 2008 Martina Hansda, D/o Suresh Soren, resident of village Jhilar, P.O. + P.S. Kauwakol, District Nawadah … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. Project Director, Sarwa Shiksha Abhiyan, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Nawadah 5. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Nawadah 6. The District Superintendent of Education cum District Programme Coordinator, Sarwa Shiksha Abhiyan, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 7. The Sub-divisional Education Officer, Nawadah 8. The Pramukh, Kauwakol Panchayat Samiti cum Chairman Prakhand Shikshak Selection Committee, Kauwakol, Nawadah 9. The Block Education Extension Officer cum Secretary Prakhand Shikshak Selection Committee, Kauwakol, Nawadah 10. The Block Development Officer, Kauwakol Nawadah cum Member Selection Committee … Respondents ---------------------------------- (in C.W.J.C. No.14900/2009) For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, Advocate Mr. Ramanuj Tiwary, Advocate Mr. Anshuman, Advocate For the State : S.C.-5 (in C.W.J.C. No.8643/2008) : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, Advocate Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Advocate & Mr. Rakesh Narayan Singh, Advocate For the State : G.A.-8 ---------------- 2 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORDER (07.12.2011) Mihir Kumar Jha, J. Heard counsel for the parties. In both the writ applications the two petitioners have assailed the same impugned order dated 21.12.2007 whereby and whereunder their appointment on the post of Prakhand Shikshak has been cancelled. Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, has submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained, inasmuch as it would be apparent on the face of record that such order of termination of service of the petitioners was passed without giving any notice and/or affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. He would also submit that the impugned order of termination being in violation of the principles of natural justice has already been stayed by this Court so far it relates to both the petitioners by two different orders dated 29.5.2008 (Martina Hansda) and 11.2.2010 (Young Bangloo) and therefore, the respondent should be directed to hold the enquiry or at least the matter may be remitted to the District Teachers Appellate Authority Nawadah which after 25.8.2008 has replaced the Deputy Development Commissioner for exercising power under Rule 18 of Bihar Panchayat Teachers Appointment Rules 2006. He has in this regard placed reliance on an order of this Court in the case of Rubi Kumari & ors. vs. The State of Bihar & ors. in C.W.J.C.No. 5130/2008 disposed of by an order dated 21.7.2011. In the considered opinion of this Court there can be 3 no difficulty in holding that any order of termination of service is bad if it is in violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioners’ specific assertion in this regard of termination of their service without notice and/or opportunity of hearing has also not been denied by the respondents in their counter affidavit. In such circumstances the impugned order of termination of their service has to be held as had and unsustainable. This will, however, mean restoring the service of the petitioners only for the limited purpose of again holding of an enquiry as to whether their selection and appointment was valid and legal. In this regard it has to be kept in mind that the petitioner Young Bangloo is said to have produced a forged mark sheet and therefore, even if the principles of natural justice was extended to him he had to justify the factum as with regard to submission of his correct mark sheet. The petitioner Young Bangloo, however, has not been produced his mark sheet before this Court and therefore, this Court will not direct for reinstatement in service till he would satisfy the competent District Teachers Appellate Authority by producing his original mark sheet which will be compared with the mark sheet that was filed by him at the time of his being selected and appointed. If the District Teachers Appellate Authority would find that the mark sheet filed by the petitioner Young Bangloo before the appointing authority prior to obtaining his appointment was forged, not only his case will be rejected but a direction will be issued for instituting a First Information Report against the petitioner Young Bangloo. On the other hand if the Authority would find no flaw in the marks sheet of the petitioner it would direct not only for reinstatement but also payment of 4 backwages. As with regard to the case of the petitioner Martina Hansda the only allegation on which her appointment has been cancelled is that he was appointed on the basis of joint merit list of both trained and untrained teachers. Mr. Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner however, would explain that even if this infirmity of non-preparation of separate merit list is said to have vitiated appointment of all the Prakhand Shikshak including Martina Hansda, the case of Martina Hansda will not be adversely affected, inasmuch as she was only Scheduled Tribe category candidate and as such, she will again be able to get herself selected. In the considered opinion of this Court this aspect of the matter has to be also examined by the District Teachers Appellate Authority which will go into the selection process and if it finds that petitioner Martina Hansda even otherwise could have been covered in course of preparation on a joint merit list on account of she being the solitary Scheduled Tribe category candidate for the post in question, her services shall stand reinstated with all consequential benefits. In other words, if the Authority would find that there was no any other flaw in selection and appointment of Martina Hansda and that she was entitled to be appointed on a post of Prakhand Shikshak in the category of Scheduled Tribe candidate, an order for his reinstatement in service will be passed and as she has been continuing in service by virtue of the interim order dated 29.5.2008 she will also be entitled for all consequential benefit. That being so, the petitioners, are directed to appear before District Teachers Appellate Authority whereafter the 5 Authority shall call for the records of the complaints received by the office of Deputy Development Commissioner, Nawadah which have been disposed of by the impugned order dated 21.12.2007and shall dispose of them afresh strictly in accordance with law in the light of the observations and directions given above. The Authority, however, must take its decision after issuing notice and/or hearing all the parties and preferably within a period of four months from the date of filing of a copy of this order. Till a final decision is taken by the Authority, the impugned order dated 21.12.2007 passed by Deputy Development Commissioner, Nawadah shall remain in abeyance and both the petitioners shall protected by the interim orders passed by this Court in their cases, which shall, however, come to an end immediately after passing of the final order by the Authority. Let a copy of this order be accordingly sent to Deputy Development Commissioner, Nawadah who is also directed to send entire records including the complaints received and disposed of by the impugned order dated 21.2.2007 to the District Teachers Appellate Authority, Nawadah for its fresh disposal by the Authority. With the aforesaid observations and directions there two writ applications are disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Patna High Court Dated the 7th December 2011 N.A.F.R./Surendra/