IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7611 of 2009 Sanjay Kumar, son of Late Bhim Nath Pathak, resident of Village – Rampur Dalan, P.S. – Muffasil, District – Katihar …………….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Member, The District Education Selection Appellate Tribunal, Katihar 3. The Education Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, New Secretariat, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Katihar 5. The Block Development Officer, Hasanganj, P.S. – Muffasil, District – Katihar 6. The District Education Officer, Katihar 7. Vikas Kumar, son of Gaya Nand Prasad Thakur resident of Sharma Engineering Works Mirchaibari, at present resident of Teja Tola Ajad Colony, P.S. – Sahayak, District – Katihar 8. The District Superintendent of Education, Katihar 9. The Block Education Extension Officer, Hasanganj, P.S. – Muffasil, District – Katihar 10. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Rampur Block – Hasanganj, P.S. – Muffasil, District – Katihar 11. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Rampur Block – Hasanganj, P.S. – Muffasil, District – Katihar 12. The Principal, New Primary School Hathia Diara (East), P. S. – Muffasil ,District – Katihar ………………… Respondents ---------------------------------- 03. 25.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. Despite service of notice, Respondent No. 10 and 11 have not appeared, though counsel, appearing for the Respondent No. 7 is present. Petitioner’s prayer is for quashing of Order, dated 25.05.2009, passed by the District Education Selection Appellate Tribunal, Katihar, whereby the Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchayat Rampur, Block – Hasanganj, 2 District – Katihar has been directed to terminate the service of the petitioner and to appoint Respondent No. 7, Vikas Kumar in place of the petitioner. The impugned order, passed by the Appellate Tribunal has been challenged by the petitioner on the ground that without issuing any notice to the petitioner, in utter violation of Principles of Natural Justice, the Tribunal has passed the impugned order, directing the Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary to terminate the petitioner and to appoint Respondent No. 7. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Block Development Officer, Hasanganj, Respondent No. 5 and the Block Education Extension Officer, Hasangaj, Respondent No. 9. In the counter affidavit, filed on behalf of Respondent No. 5 and 9, it has been stated, in Gram Panchayat Rampur, total 20 posts of Panchayat Teachers was sanctioned and as per roster of reservation, in the General Candidate (Male) – 5 vacancies; General Candidate (Female) – 5 vacancies; Most Backward Class (Male) – 01 vacancy; Most Backward Class (Female) – 01 vacancy; Other Backward Class (Male) – 02 vacancies; Other Backward Class (Female) – 01 vacancy; Scheduled Class (Male) – 01 vacancy; Scheduled Class (Female) – 02 3 vacancy; Scheduled Tribes (Male) – 0; Scheduled Tribes (Female) – 01 vacancy; and reserved (Female) – 01 = Total 20 vacancies. As against 20 vacancies, 1205 applications were received. A merit panel was prepared on the basis of marks obtained by the candidates in Intermediate examination, as per the provisions laid down under the said Panchayat Teachers Rules, 2006. Against provisional merit list, objections were invited and entertained as per the directions issued by the Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. Thereafter, candidates were called for counseling, giving information through press communiqué as well as the notice, pasted on the Notice Board of the Gram Panchayat and the Block Office. The counseling was held in Panchayat Bhawan of the Panchayat and the selected candidates were issued employment letter. Petitioner participated in the counseling and his name was at serial no. 11 of the merit list. Appointment letter was issued to the petitioner and he joined in the Primary School, Hathiya Diara. So far Respondent No. 7 is concerned he did not appear before the Selection Committee for counseling and that was the reason that he was not 4 selected. It has also been admitted in paragraph no. 9 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent No. 9 that Appellate Tribunal directed the Respondent Nos. 10 and 11 to terminate the petitioner from his service and appoint Respondent No. 7 without issuing any notice to the petitioner. As such the order, passed by the Tribunal was completely in violation of Rules of Natural Justice. Considering the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondents and the statements made in the Writ Application by the petitioner, I find that the impugned order, dated 25.05.2009, passed by the Member, District Education Selection Appellate Tribunal, Katihart, is fit to be quashed. This matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh hearing, giving opportunity to all concerned, including the petitioner, the Respondent Nos. 7, 10 and 11. The connected record may also be called in connection with the selection / appointment of Panchayat Teachers. In case, it is found that the Respondent No. 7 intentionally did not appear for counseling and subsequently at a belated stage, filed his appeal, challenging the appointment of petitioner, a reasoned order may be passed, dismissing the appeal, preferred by Respondent No. 7. Petitioner is 5 directed to produce this Order before Tribunal by 15th of November, 2011 and the Tribunal will pass a fresh order within two months from the date of communication of this Order by the petitioner to the Tribunal. Accordingly, this Writ Application is disposed of. SKM (Mridula Mishra, J.)