IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16027 of 2010 Bishwajit Kumar, Son of Shri Jay Narayan Kumar, resident of Village- Dhakjari, P.O.-Dhakjari (Bharouli), P.S.-Sonbarsa Kachahari, Saharsa. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar through the Director Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The District Magistrate, Saharsa. 3. The District Superintendent of Education, Saharsa. 4. The Block Development Officer, Mahishi (Saharsa). 5. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Rajanpur (Mahishi). 6. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj, Ranjanpur (Mahishi), Saharsa. -Respondents. ----------- 02 04.11.2010 It appears that the petitioner had applied for appointment as a Primary Panchayat Teacher under Backward category. On the merit list being drawn up, he was shown as no.1 in the Backward category having the highest marks. He was selected for appointment but while making appointment in the roaster he was placed in the place of General category obviously to make place for someone else in the Backward category. There were some persons of General category who were not appointed though they were in the merit list above the petitioner. He complained to the Lokayukt. The Lokayukt asked the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Saharasa to enquire into the matter and submit a report. It appears that pursuant to those reports and communications from the Lokayukt petitioner is sought to be disturbed. Petitioner submits that he cannot be disturbed, - 2 - at best he will be placed in Backward category and, being first in the merit list in that category, the person lowest in merit list in Backward category, who has been appointed, will have to be dismissed. Apportionment of category in the roaster or place in the roaster is not petitioner’s responsibility. In such a situation, petitioner cannot be disturbed much less by the District Magistrate who under the Bihar Primary Panchayat Teachers (Appointment & Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 has no authority. In my view, on petitioner’s own showing the matter is receiving attention of the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Saharsa. Petitioner admits that he has received the notice and appeared before the Appellate Authority. It would only be appropriate that petitioner challenges the order or direction as issued by the Collector or any step taken to disestablish the appointment of petitioner before the Appellate Authority as an independent appeal. It is needless to say that the Appellate Authority would decide the issue expeditiously as it is already in seisin of the matter though under directions of the Lokayukt Appellate Authority would keep in mind that it is an independent statutory functionary under Rule-18 of the Bihar Primary Panchayat Teachers (Appointment & Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 and cannot be dictated except by law. - 3 - In view of the facts, as noticed above, it would be seen that petitioner, prima facie, cannot be disturbed and that position must be maintained till final orders are passed by the Appellate Authority provided petitioner moves the Appellate Authority within three weeks from today and the Appellate Authority decides the matter after notice to all concerned parties including the parties likely to be affected by its decision within a period of two months thereafter. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)