IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16471 of 2009 1. JHULAN BAITHA S/O SRI TARKESHWAR BAITHA, R/O VILL-NARAYANCHAK, P.LS- MORHAURA, DISTT- SARAN AT Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SARAN AT CHAPRA 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SARAN AT CHAPRA 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MARHAURA, DISTT- SARAN AT CHAPRA 5. BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENTION OFFICER, MARHAURA, DISTT- SARAN AT CHAPRA 6. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT REAJ, MADHOPUR, P.S- HARHAURA, DISTT- SARAN AT CHAPRA 7. THE PANCHAYAT SWEAK, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, MADHOPUR, P.S- MARHAURA, DISTT- SARAN AT CHAPRA 8. THE DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SARAN AT CHAPRA ----------- 02/ 01.02.2010 CWJC No. 16471 of 2009 & I.A. No. 625 of 2010 Writ application has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of order contained in letter no. 409 dated 15.7.2009 passed by District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Saran at Chapra and also for quashing of the order passed by the Block Development Officer, Marhaura dated 15.10.2008 contained in Memo No. 57. The Block Development Officer by his order has cancelled entire appointment of Panchayat teachers made in the year, 2006 in Gram Panchayat Raj, Madhopur. The order passed by the Block Development Officer was challenged by the petitioner by filing C.W.J.C. No.443 of 2009, which was - 2 - disposed of by order dated 13.5.2009 directing the petitioner for filing appeal before the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal was directed to decide it after hearing all concerned. C.W.J.C. No. 3364 of 2009 had been filed by one Ramawati Kumari, whose appointment had already been cancelled on account of the order passed by the Block Development Officer, Marhaura. This application was also disposed of with similar direction. She filed Appeal Case No. 822 of 2009. Appeal Case No. 822 of 2009 was decided by the Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 15.9.2009 affirming the order passed by the Block Development Officer. However, in these appeals several candidates selected and appointed as teachers were not made party. Accordingly, the petitioner had also not been made party. Petitioner in the light of the direction of High Court filed an appeal before the Tribunal on 14.7.2009. Just after one day of the filing of appeal by the petitioner, appeal preferred by Ramawati Kumari was dismissed by order dated 15.7.2009. Petitioner, when came to know about it, filed an application under the Right to Information Act regarding the status of his appeal and information was supplied to him that since - 3 - vide order contained in Memo No. 409 dated 15.7.2009 Appeal No. 822 of 2009 has been dismissed, the appeal preferred by the petitioner needs no fresh consideration. Petitioner’s grievance is that Appeal No. 822 of 2009 was decided without issuing any notice and the appeal preferred by him is not considered on the ground that similar matter has already been decided by the Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 822 of 2009. The Block Development Officer had also passed order without any notice to him, as such at all stages he has not been provided with an opportunity to defend his case. Principle of natural justice has been violated at every stage and his vested right has been taken away. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the order contained in letter no. 457 dated 28.8.2009 supplied to the petitioner by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Saran at Chapra under Right to Information Act, the appellate order passed in Appeal Case No. 822 of 2009 is quashed. This matter is remitted back to the District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Saran at Chapra. The Appellate - 4 - Tribunal will issue notice to all necessary parties in both the appeals i.e. Appeal No. 822 of 2009 preferred by Ramawati Kumari and Appeal No. 939 of 2009 dated 14.7.2009 preferred by the petitioner. Both the appeals shall be heard analogous, giving proper opportunity of hearing to all concerned and order will be passed in accordance with law. This writ application is allowed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)