IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5849 of 2009 AMIT KUMAR OJHA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS For the Petitioner: Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Mr. Dhanjay Kumar Singh. For the State : Mr. Madhukar Mishra, AC to GA 7 ----------- 2. 12.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. CWJC No. 13715 of 2006 was preferred by another with regard to appointment of Shiksha Mitra in Gram Panchayat Raj, Mirhatti, District-Banka. It was disposed on 27.8.2007 to pursue remedies under Rule 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 before the Block Development Officer. L.P.A. No. 57 of 2008 against the same declined interference holding that there was no infirmity in the order on 22.5.2008. On both occasion, the Block Development Officer was the competent statutory authority to examine the matters under Rule 18. The submission is that on 31.12.2008 when the Block Development Officer passed the order in pursuance of the aforesaid orders of this Court, and that too without hearing the petitioner, the Block Development Officer stood divested of his powers by virtue of 2008 amendment and under Rule 2 of the notification creating the Appellate Authority dated 25.8.2008, all such pending matters before the Block Development Officer stood transferred to the Appellate Authority. 2 The impugned order dated 31.12.2008 and the consequential order dated 22.4.2009, whether it be in violation of principles of natural justice or lack of jurisdiction in the Block Development Officer, in either event, is not sustainable. The orders are, accordingly, set aside. The subject matter of CWJC No. 13715 of 2006 and L.P.A. No. 57 of 2008 shall be deemed to be a matter pending on the date that the Appellate Authority was created and the issue stood transferred to it. It is made clear that the Appellate Authority retains the jurisdiction to examine the issue and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, he is entitled to consequential relief at this stage in view of the impugned orders having been set aside on lack of jurisdiction. The writ application stands allowed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)