IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.W.J.C. No.7014 of 2009 Usha Kumari, W/O Lalan Kumar, resident of Village Madhepura, Ward No. 14, P.S. + Distt. Madhepura .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, Araria 3. District Superintendent of Education, Araria 4. Block Development Officer, Palashi Block, Distt. Araria 5. Mukhiya Pipr Bijwara Panchayat Block Plasi, P.S. Palani, Distt. Araria 6. Panchayat Sachiv of Pipra Bijwara Panchayat Block Plani, P.S. Plani, Distt. Araria 7. Rita Kumari, W/O Naresh Mandal, resident of Pipra Bijwara, P.S. Palani, Distt. Araria .. Respondents **** /2/ 30.06.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner has a grievance as she has not been appointed on the post of Panchayat Teacher though had higher marks than persons, who were appointed. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the irregularities committed in the teachers’ appointment was enquired by the District Superintendent of Education-cum-District Coordinator, Araria, and vide Letter No. 1143, dated 08th February, 2007, a direction was issued to the Mukhiya, Pipra Gram Panchayat, to appoint Umesh Chandra Thakur, Usha Kumari (petitioner) and Kumari Minaxi on the post of teacher canceling 2 appointment of such persons, who had got lesser marks. It has also been submitted that Kumari Minaxi, in the light of this direction, has already been appointed. 3. I find that under Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers' (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006, in case of complaint against appointment, the Block Development Officer was the only competent authority to entertain any complaint relating to any appointment. He could only direct to conduct any enquiry, in this regard and pass any order relating to cancellation of appointment or making appointment. Annexure 1 is not the order of the Block Development Officer. It is an order passed by the District Superintendent of Education. The District Superintendent of Education has simply communicated this order to the Block Development Officer and directed the Mukhiya to cancel appointment of others and appoint three persons, which also includes petitioner. If petitioner has any complaint, she can make a complaint before the competent authority. Earlier under 2006 Rules it was the Block Development Officer. Now the Rule has been amended in 2008 and appellate authority is the Tribunal as provided under Rule 18 of 2008 Rules. Petitioner may approach and file her 3 appeal before the District Tribunal as provided under Rule 18 of 2008 Rules. The appellate forum, in case such appeal is filed, may consider and decide it within three months of it’s filing. 4. This application is dismissed. Cp:2/S.A. (Mridula Mishra, J.)