IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16658 of 2009 1. MANORMA KUMARI @ MANORMA DEVI W/O SRI UDAY RAI R/O VILL KARAI, P.O. LAHSUNA, P.S. MASAURHI, DISTT- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATI RAJ DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR , PANCHAYATI RAJ DIRECTORATE GOVENMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE PATNA 5. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER MASAURHI 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MASAURHI, DISTT- PATNA 7. THE SARPANCH , GRAM KACHEHARI KARAI, P.O. LASUNA, BLOCK MASAURHI, DISTT- PATNA 8. SMT. MEENA KUMARI W/O SRI SATYENDRA NARAIN SINGH R/O VILL & P.O. LAHSUNA , P.S. MASAURHI, DISTT- PATNA ----------- 2. 19.1.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Pursuant to his application, the petitioner came to be appointed as Secretary, Gram Katchehry on 8.3.2008. Issues of eligibility of others based on Madhyama qualification on the ground of being equivalent to Matriculate stipulated under the advertisement, then came up for consideration pursuant to certain orders of this Court. The respondents have therefore issued necessary notification on 6.1.2009 treating the qualification of Madhyama equivalent to Matriculation, for appointment with effect from 31.1.2008. Further, guidelines have been issued with regard to consideration of the cases of those who may have raised this issue prior to 31.1.2008. This Court in C.W.J.C. 16312 of 2009 has already held that those appointed prior to the policy decision dated 6.1.2009, like the petitioner, fall in the category of a completed transaction. In absence of any allegations of any 2 illegality in the procedure or selection of their appointment being contrary to law etc. such appointments cannot be reopened by the respondents on the aforesaid ground. It is additionally urged on behalf of the petitioner that before issuing the termination order dated 10.11.2009, no show cause notice was issued to her. Respondent 8 is stated to be the beneficiary. Since notice has not been issued to respondent no. 8 at this stage, the matter is remanded to the S.D.O. to consider the matter after hearing all concerned including respondent no. 8 and pas a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It shall be open for the petitioner to make appropriate application for interim relief before the S.D.O. so that her claim be not frustrated and the S.D.O. is obliged to consider the application for interim relief within a maximum period of two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the presentation of the same before him, pending final disposal of the matter. The petitioner shall also be entitled to raise other claims with regard to her salary etc. for any period she has worked and claims salary has not been paid, which has also to be decided and considered by the S.D.O. within the same period. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)