IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 10354 of 2010 1. LALDEO PANDIT S/O SRI LAL BIHARI PANDIT R/O VILL.- BANBIRA, P.S.- RAJPUR, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 2. RANJU KUMARI W/O SRI RATAN KUMAR KARN R/O VILL.- MUBARAKPUR, P.S.- MUSRIGHARARI, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 3. ROHINI KUMARI SINGH W/O LATE PAWAN KUMAR SINGH R/O AT+P.O.- GANGAPUR, P.S.- MUSRIGHARARI, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 4. TULIKA KUMARI D/O ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA R/O BASMATI BHAWAN, MAJHOLIA ROAD, P.S.- KAZHI MOHAMMADPUR, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR 5. KIRAN KUMARI W/O SRI SANJAY KUMAR PASWAN R/O VILL.- SUPAUL, P.S.- ANGARGHAT, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 6. MITHILESH KUMAR S/O SRI BAIDYANATH MAHTO R/O AT+P.O.- GANGAPUR, P.S.- MUSARIGHARARI, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE MEMBER, DISTRICT TEACHER EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY, SAMASTIPUR, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SAMASTIPUR, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 6. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SAMASTIPUR, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 7. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SARAIRANJAN, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 8. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, SARAIRANJAN, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 9. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, GANGAPUR, P.S.- MUSARIGHARARI, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 10. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, GANGAPUR, P.S.- MUSARIGHARARI, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR ----------- 2 12.08.2010 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. This case depicts a very sorry state of affairs which is now coming to this Court. Such grievances have now started multiplying. The grievance is with regard to selection process for appointment of Panchayat Teachers. The petitioners were selected as untrained Teachers. By order of the District Panchayat Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal, Samastipur dated 21.05.2010, as passed in a group of appeals, their appointments have been cancelled. The Tribunal has ordered that steps be 2 taken to select the ten untrained Teachers after taking fresh steps for counselling. Petitioner’ appointments being terminated, they have come to this Court. It appears that initially there were 16 posts of Teachers that had to be filled up for Gram Panchayat Raj Gangapur, Block – Sarairanjan in the district of Samastipur. Out of the 16, 6 were for trained Teachers which were duly filled up and there is no dispute in relation thereto. So far as remaining 10 are concerned, they were to be filled up subject to reservation by untrained Teachers. As noted in the order of the Tribunal, in piecemeal, there was counselling done. The counselling and selection pursuant thereto was disapproved by the District Magistrate on report submitted by Block Development Officer (BDO). Counselling was reordered again. When counselling was to be done, serious allegations were made against the Mukhiya who was demanding huge illegal gratification. In this second round, petitioners were then selected. Petitioners’ selection was on removal of earlier selected persons who have all filed the application pursuant to which the Tribunal has passed the order. Once petitioners were selected, again there were complaints, there were recounselling. Such process went up and down and ultimately terminated in the orders of the Tribunal whereby the six petitioners who had been selected and were working had been terminated with the order aforesaid. Having examined the entire facts, in my view, it is apparent that proper selection in a transparent manner has not been done and the Tribunal is correct in that regard. But the Tribunal’s order is not clear as 3 to at what stage, the selection process is to start and what steps have to be taken. In my view, the selection process has to start from the very beginning in respect of untrained Teachers. The Panchayat Selection Committee will make a merit list ignoring all counselling and all merit lists prepared earlier. Upon the merit list being made, a public notice thereof would have to be given in which it would be indicated as to where the merit list would be available for perusal of candidates and on what dates. It would be required to be displayed at the District Headquarters, Block Headquarters and Panchayat Headquarters apart from other places. In the public notice, a date would be fixed to receive objections as against the merit list so prepared which would be one week after the display date. Thereafter, in the public notice itself, a date for counselling would be fixed which would be one week after the date of objection and the final appointment list would be displayed a week thereafter. All these dates must be publicly disclosed in one notice itself including Hindi newspaper having local circulation. All persons eligible who have already applied and who would be considered irrespective of they having figured in the earlier merit list or not, they having given their consent earlier or not. Appointments would then be made according to roster. The process would start within four weeks from today. It would be the responsibility of the BDO, Sarairanjan, District – Samastipur to ensure proper compliance thereof. In so far as the six petitioners are concerned, they had been selected, appointment letters issued and they were working till the Tribunal passed the order. In order that the teaching in Schools are not 4 disrupted, they would continue till fresh selections are made and would be entitled to their wages from the time of their selection to the time they are removed consequent to fresh appointments but would be deemed to be continuing if they are selected once again. The BDO, Sarairanjan would ensure compliance of this order. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)