IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5482 of 2009 Gyatri Kumari, W/O Brij Mohan Prasad Singh, resident of village Sorhatta, P.O. B.B.Pur, District- Vaishali ………. Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2.The District Magistrate, Vaishali 3.The Appellate Authority through its Chairman at P.O. Vaishali, P.S. Vaishali, District- Vaishali 4.The District Superintendent of Education, Vaishali 5.Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Enayat Nagar, P.O. Goraul, District- Vaishali 6.Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Enayat Nagar, P.O. Goraul, District- Vaishali 7.Renu Kumari, W/O Pramod Kumar Chaudhary, resident of village & P.O. Mono Mahima, P.S. Goraul, District- Vaishali ………….. Respondents ----------- 4. 11/10/2010 In this writ application, petitioner has challenged the order of the Appellate Authority dated 25.3.2009, as contained in Annexure-5. The order shows that on a complaint of one Renu Kumari that she was not allowed to appear in the counselling, although persons with lower merits were appointed, the Appellate Authority passed orders for her counselling. Grievance of the petitioner is that the entire selection process was complete and the petitioner was selected for appointment and her certificates were sent for verification. While the said verification was pending, the impugned order has been passed by the 2 Appellate Authority. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents and it is stated in the counter affidavit that directions have been issued to the Panchayat Secretary and the Mukhiya to issue notice to said Renu Kumari twice, but till now she has not appeared for her counselling. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner, who was selected and was waiting orders for her joining, was not given any opportunity to be heard. This fact is not denied by the respondents. The order of the Appellate Authority, Annexure-5, shows that merely on the complaint of said Renu Kumari and affidavit on behalf of one Sunita Kumari, order was passed. The order of the Appellate Authority does not show that records of the process of appointment were examined and factual position was ascertained. In the circumstances, this Court finds that the order of the Appellate Authority is unsustainable in law. The Appellate Authority ought to have examined the original records before coming to the conclusion that any 3 candidate was deprived of consideration. If such fact is not established from the records, naturally, the person, who was selected, appointed and was waiting for her joining pending verification of her certificates, was entitled to be allowed to join. The said order of the Appellate Authority is, therefore, set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Appellate Authority, where the petitioner will be given opportunity to appear and be heard. The Appellate Authority shall also examine the original records in respect of appointment and shall pass reasoned orders in accordance with law within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application is accordingly disposed of. Pradeep/ (J. N. Singh, J.)