IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10951 of 2007 CHINTA KUMARI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 04.07.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner was an applicant for the post of Panchayat Shikshak in reserve category claiming to have 62.2% marks. Her name was included in the panel prepared on 22.11.2006. The grievance is that her name was wrongly included in the panel of general category and not in the reserve category leading to the appointment of one Sunita Kumari from the reserve category, who had only 61.2% marks less than the petitioner. A supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the petitioner encloses an order dated 9.1.2008 of the statutory authority under Rule 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006, who on enquiry reports that the Mukhia and the concerned Panchayat Sachiv had made illegal appointment of Sunita Kumari, and, therefore, he annulled the same. In view of the contention of the petitioner being found correct and availability of consequent vacancy, her case is required to be considered in accordance with law. However, this Court finds from Annexure-12 dated 9.1.2008 to the supplementary affidavit that it refers to a Government order dated 30.11.2007 stopping all procedures for appointment on the post of Panchayat Shikshak. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the State has no objection to the disposal of the writ application that if the ban dated - 2 - 30.11.2007 referred to in the communication of Respondent no. 18 is not in existence and procedures for appointment have commenced afresh, the Respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law forthwith and take an appropriate decision in the matter within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. If the ban is in existence till date, no sooner that the ban is lifted by the State Government, the Respondents shall be obliged to consider the case of the petitioner and take appropriate decision within a period of eight weeks from the date of upliftment of such ban. The writ application is disposed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)