IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15531 of 2001 Ganesh Sahani, Son of Sri Mahadeo Sahani posted as Peon in Brahmanand High School, Sehan, Police Station Patepur, District Vaisali. ----- Petitioner Versus 1. State of Bihar. 2. The District Education Officer, Vaishali. 3. The Headmaster, Brahmanand High School, Sehan Police Station Patepur, District Vaishali. --------- Respondents ----------- 8 05.07.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. In this writ application, the prayer of the petitioner reads as follows:- “1. That this is an application for quashing of an order as contained in memo no. 2553 Hazipur dated 5.9.2000 passed and issued by the Respondent no.2, by which service of the petitioner has been terminated on the ground that his appointment was made in illegal and irregular manner, by issuing an appropriate writ and further for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in service on the post of peon in Brahmanand High School, Sehan Police Station-Patepur, District- Vaishali (hereinafter referred to as „the school‟) with all consequential benefits.” Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the appointment of the 2 petitioner was not only made by the prescribed competent authority, namely, the Headmaster of the school but also after undergoing the prescribed procedure in terms of the circular of the State Government as contained in letter no. 16441 dated 3.12.1980. He would, therefore, submit that the presumption drawn in the impugned order passed by the District Education Officer, Vaishali as with regard to cancelling the appointment of the petitioner is wholly unjustified. In this case the impugned order of termination is a speaking order and goes to show that the same was passed after not only complying the principle of natural justice but also after recording that procedure prescribed by the personal department letter no. 16441 dated 3.12.1980 was not at all followed. In this context, the authority after holding an enquiry has found that the appointment letter was issued on 27.1.1997 and the alleged advertisement was issued on 31.12.1997. Apart from that, the claim of the petitioner was that he was appointed by the Headmaster from the district panel and had relied on letter of the Nazarat Deputy Collector dated 29.3.1997. But 3 again that has been found to be void, inasmuch as, the appointment of the petitioner was made on 27.1.1997. It may also be useful to note here that this Court in order to get this controversy decided had called for the panel in question from the Collectorate of Hajipur of the year 1996-97 but it has been reported by the Deputy Collectorate of the District Nazarat that as a matter of fact, there was no panel prepared by the Vaishali Collectorate in the year 1996-97. If that be so, the appointment of the petitioner from a panel which was never made, would itself establish the nature and extent of illegality committed in the appointment of the petitioner. This Court will not like to make any further comment on the eligibility qualification of the petitioner, inasmuch as, it has come on record that the certificate of educational qualification of the petitioner was issued only on 8.4.1997 but his appointment was made on 8.1.1997. This aspect of the matter will not, however, as serious as the infirmity that even when there was no panel prepared by the Collector, the appointment letter of the 4 petitioner issued by the Headmaster based on the panel of the Collectorate. Such illegal appointment by this Court as also by the Apex Court have been held to be void ab-initio conferring no right to the incumbent. Reference in this connection may be made to a recent judgment of Apex Court in the case of Md. Ashif & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2010(2)PLJR SC 156. That being so, there is no merit in this application and the same is, accordingly dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)