IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.701 of 2008 ---- Rebat Lal Sharma, Son of Shri Baudhi Sharma, Resident of Village- Dira Chandpur, P.S.-Falka, District-Katihar. ….. Respondents-Appellants. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Purnea Division, Purnea. 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Katihar. 5. The District Education Officer, Katihar. Respondents- Respondents. 6. Rakesh Kumar, Son of Sghir Sukhdeo Prasad Mandal, Resident of village-Dira Chandpur, P.S.-Falka, District-Katihar. … Petitioner- Respondent. ----------- For the appellant : Mr. Vishwanth Prasad Sinha, Senior Advocate Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate For the respondent nos. 1 to 5 : Mr. Shankar Kumar, Junior Counsel to Additional Advocate General V For respondent No.6: Mr. Jyoti Saran, Advocate ------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal -------- Dated, the 19th November, 2008. Appeal is admitted. 2. Mr. Shankar Kumar, government counsel, waives service for respondent nos. 1 to 5. Mr. Jyoti Saran, advocate, waives service - 2 - for respondent no.6. 3. In view of the short controversy involved in the appeal, we hear and decide the appeal at this stage itself. 4. The process for appointment of additional Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in Katihar District commenced in 2004 and on completion of that process, the select committee prepared the list of 20 candidates on the basis of their comparative merit for filling up four vacant posts. From that select list, the candidates at serial no.1 (Chandan Bharti) and serial no.3 (Rebatlal Sharma)- both male, and the candidates at serial no.4 (Shashikala) and serial no.5 Vijay Sharma Bharti- both female, were appointed to the post of Additional Shiksha Mitra. The writ petitioner (present respondent no.6) was at serial no.14 in the select list. He challenged the appointment of the present appellant (Rebat Lal Sharma) to the post of additional Panchayat Shiksha Mitra and prayed for direction to the concerned authority to appoint him to that post. He mainly relied upon the roster fixed under the rules whereby first post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra (male) was to go to a candidate of general category and the second post was reserved for a candidate from extremely backward class. According to the writ petitioner, the candidate at serial no. 1 (Chandan Bharti) having been appointed against the general category, the second post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra as per the roster was required to be filled in by extremely backward class candidate and he being the most meritorious candidate in the select list in the category of extremely backward class - 3 - candidates, he ought to have been appointed and the appointment of the present appellant was bad in law. 5. The writ petition was contested by the state government and its functionaries. As a matter of fact, the present appellant (respondent no.6) did not appear on 11th August, 2008, when the writ petition was heard by the Single Judge. The Single Judge held that the appointment of the respondent no.6 (present appellant) was wrong as the vacancy reserved for extremely backward class candidate has been filled in by him who did not belong to that category and, accordingly, set aside his appointment. He also held that the writ petitioner was entitled to be considered for appointment on the post of additional Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. 6. The Roster for appointment to the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra (male) is thus: (d) iapk;r f’k{kk fe= (iq#"k) dk jksLVj Øe la[;k iapk;r f’k{kk fe= (iq#"k) dk yxkrkj Øe vkj{k.k dksfV fu;qDr O;fDr dk uke 1- 1 vukjf{kr 2- 2 vR;Ur fiNM+koxZ 3- 3 vukjf{kr 4- 4 vuqlwfpr tkfr 5- 5 vukjf{kr 6- 6 fiNM+koxZ 7- 7 vukjf{kr 7. That out of the four posts to be filled in, two posts were to - 4 - be filled in from amongst the male candidates only is not in dispute. As per roster, the first post is to go to a general category candidate and that has been filled in by Chandan Bharti. His appointment has not been challenged. The second post is reserved for extremely backward class candidate. That appellant does not belong to extreme backward class is not disputed by his counsel. In this situation, obviously, the second post could not have been filled in by a candidate other than the extremely backward class candidate. The appellant being not a candidate from extremely backward class could not, therefore, have been appointed to the post of additional Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. His appointment has rightly been set aside by the Single Judge. 8. We may notice here that the writ petitioner’s name in the select list finds place at serial no.14. The material on record does not conclusively establish as to whether the candidates in merit list above the writ petitioner belong to extremely backward class or not. As a matter of fact, pleading in this regard is totally lacking. In the circumstances, the proper course is to direct the concerned authority to appoint the most meritorious candidate from amongst extremely backward class candidates as per the select list for the second post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, and if the writ petitioner fits the bill, to appoint him to that post accordingly. 9. Consequently, we dispose of the appeal by observing that the concerned authority shall fill in the second post of additional Panchayat Shiksha Mitra (male) reserved for extremely backward class - 5 - from amongst the most meritorious candidate as per select list from that category. This exercise shall be completed by the concerned authority within four weeks from today. No order as to cost. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J. Sunil