IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8070 of 2010 1. MANOJ KUMAR MANOHAR S/O SHRI DEO NARAYAN MANDAL R/O VILL.- THARBITTA, P.S.- KISHANGANJ, DISTT.- SUPAUL Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE MEMBER, TEACHERS APPOINTMENT DISTRICT APPELLATE AUTHORITY, SUPAUL 3. THE COLLECTOR, SUPAUL 4. THE D.D.C., SUPAUL 5. THE PRAKHAND VIKAS PADADHIKARI, KISHANPUR PRAKHAND, DISTT.- SUPAUL 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, KISHANPUR, SUPAUL 7. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, MAUJHA, P.S. KISHANPUR, DISTT.- SUPAUL 8. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, MAUJHA, P.S.- KISHANPUR, DISTT.- SUPAUL 9. THE HEAD MASTER, PRIMARY SCHOOL, SISWA, P.S. KISHANPUR, DISTT.- SUPAUL 10. PRANAV KUMAR PRASOON S/O NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER R/O MOHALLA- VIDYAPURI, MELA ROAD, WARD NO.-2, TOWN+P.S.+DISTT.- SUPAUL ----------- 2 28/01/2011 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the private respondent as well as the State, the Court does not find any illegality in the decision rendered by the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority in Appeal No. 181 of 2009 because it has rightly held that the Block Development Officer, though vested with the power at the relevant time to adjudicate, did not have the power of review. Once - 2 - adjudication was already made by the Block Development Officer and subsequently he changed the said decision by yet another decision. It is in this background the matter has traveled to the present Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority has rightly quashed the subsequent order on the ground that the Block Development Officer has no power of review. There is no infirmity in the said decision. In fact, it is in accordance with law. This writ application is dismissed. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)