IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18286 of 2009 1. SUJIT KUMAR SINGH S/O ANIL KUMAR SINGH R/O VILL- SAVAN BIGRAHA, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 2. RAJESH KUMAR SINGH S/O PARASNATH SINGH R/O VILL- BELA GOVINDPUR, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 3. BABITA KUMARI W/O RAJ KAPOOR SINGH R/O VILL- BELA GOVINDPUR, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 4. SANDHYA KUMARI W/O PRABHAKAR SINGH R/O VILL- SWAN BIGRAHA, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SIWAN 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFIER, (B.D.O) DARAUNDA BLOCK, DISTT- SIWAN 5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER (B.E.E.O), BLOCKDARAUNA, DISTT- SIWAN 6. THE MEMBER DISTRICT TEACHER EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SIWAN 7. THE MUKHIA NAMELY KAWAL YADAV GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ RAMSAPUR, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 8. THE PANCHAYAT SACHIV MANORANJAN SINGH GRAM PANCHAYAT RAMASPUR, P.S-DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 9. MUNI DEVI W/O SHRI RAJESH PRASAD, R/O VILL-MACHHAUTA, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 10. BASANTI DEVI W/O SHRI PRITHVI RAM, R/O VILL- LOPER, P.O-RAMSAPUR, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 11. SARAVJEET RAM S/O SHSRI RAMNATH RAM R/O VILL-NAWALPUR, P.O- MHARAJGANJ, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 12. KUMARI MEENA SINGH W/O SRI RAMPARSAN SINGH R/O VILL SAVAN BIGRAHA, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 13. KUMARI MALTI D/O RAMA CHAUDHARY, R/O VILL&PO- RAMSAPUR, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 14. PUSHPA KUMARI W/O SHRI RAMESHWAR BHAGAT, R/O VILL RUIA, P.O- RUIA BANGARA, DISTT- SIWAN 15. RAMESH KUMAR S/O SHRI GAMA CHAUDHARY R/O VILL &P.O- RAMSAPUR, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 16. SOBHA KUMARI D/O SHRI ANIRUDH SINGH, R/O VILL SSAVAN BIGRAHA, P.O- MAHARAJGANJ, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN 17. UPENDRA KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE SUDARSHAN SINGH R/O VILL- SAVAN BIGRAHA, P.O- MAHARAJGANJ, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN FOR THE PETITIONER : - MR. RAMCHANDRA SAHNI, ADV FOR THE STATE : - MR. ABINASH KUMAR, ACT TO GP I. FOR RESPONDENT NOS. 8 TO 16 : - MR. RAM SURESH RAI, SR. ADV MR.UDAI SHANKAR SINGH, ADV ----------- 02/ 22.04.2010 Heard counsels for the petitioners, State as well as - 2 - respondent nos. 8 to 16. Respondent Nos. 8 to 16 are the candidates, who were appointed under 2006 Rules. The issue relating to appointment in Gram Panchayat Raj, Ramsapur, Block – Daraunda in the district of Siwan has travelled to this Court in four writ applications. Finally by order passed in CWJC No. 8172 of 2007 and other writ applications, the matter was remitted to the District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Siwan for deciding the issue relating to appointment, giving proper notice to all concerned and looking into connected records. As per the direction in the earlier writ application persons already appointed were allowed to continue on the post. Such appointees though continuing to discharge their duties, were not paid their salary, as such they filed another writ application i.e. CWJC No. 7801 of 2009. While CWJC No. 7801 of 2009, filed by the earlier appointees was pending, the appeal preferred by the petitioners in CWJC No. 8172 of 2007 and other writ applications, were disposed of by the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed appeal, and the present writ - 3 - application has been filed for quashing of the order passed in the appeal by the Appellate Tribunal. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the appeal has been disposed of by the Tribunal, ignoring the direction in the writ application. Impugned order has been passed without looking into the relevant records, connected with the appointment and without giving proper opportunity of hearing to necessary and interested parties. The ground taken by the petitioner for assailing the impugned order is contradicted by the statement made in the counter affidavit filed by Respondents 8 to 16. Respondents 8 to 16 have stated that notices were issued to them, they appeared before the Tribunal and considering their submissions, final order was passed by the Tribunal. On perusal of the impugned order and the finding recorded therein, I find that the Tribunal, before deciding the appeal, had issued notice to the Mukhiya, Panchayat Secretary, Members of the Appointment Committee and the persons, who were earlier appointed in the process of appointment. In the impugned order, submissions made by each party has been considered and recorded. It has also - 4 - been stated in the order that on perusal of the connected documents and the evidence as well as the submissions made by the parties, the opinion of the tribunal is that there was no illegality in the appointment. Counsel for the petitioners is aggrieved for the reason that in the last paragraph the tribunal has given reference of order passed in CWJC No. 8172 of 2007 for coming to this finding that no irregularity was there in the appointment. I do not find that only because reference of CWJC No. 8172 of 2007 has been given, it should be presumed the Tribunal without considering the relevant materials, needed to be considered, has come to the conclusion that no irregularities were committed in the appointment of respondents 8 to 17. I find that the dispute relating to appointment of Panchayat teachers in the concerned Gram Panchayat, which is continuing since 2006, should come to an end. There is no error in the impugned order. This application is dismissed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)