IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.892 of 2011 (Arising out of C.W.J.C. No. 9695 of 2010) 1. Satrughan Kumar @ Shatrughan Kumar S/O Sri Ram Naresh Mahto R/O Vill.- Bandwar, Brahmpura Tola, P.S.- Nima Chandpura, Distt.- Begusarai(Bihar)…………………………………………Petitioner/Appellant. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary Cum Commissioner, Department Of Human Resources Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Begusarai 5. The District Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal, Begusarai 6. The Member, the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal, Begusarai 7. The District Superintendent of Education, Begusarai 8. The District Education Officer, Begusarai 9. The Block Development Extension Officer, Begusarai 10. The Block Development Officer, Begusarai 11. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Bandwar, Begusarai 12. The Panchayat Secretary Gram Panchayat Raj Bandwar Begusarai 13. The Headmaster, Primary School, Kunjartoli Bandwar, Begusarai 14. Md. Sufian Alam, S/o Md. Sultan Alam, R/O Vill.- Bandwar, P.S.- Nima Chandpura, Distt.- Begusarai 15. Sunil Kumar S/O Sri Ganga Prasad Das, R/O Vill.- Jinedpur, P.S.- Nima Chandpura, Distt.- Begusarai………………………………………Respondents ----------- 2. 29.8.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The appellant was appointed as a Panchayat Teacher in April, 2007 pursuant to preparation of a panel dated 31.10.2006. While preparing the said panel the concerned authority ignored the clarification issued by the Government of Bihar in the Department of Human Resources Department issued on 1.8.2006 which was brought as an Annexure before the Writ Court through counter affidavit. That clarification was permissible in terms of Rule 19 of Rules of 2006 under which the panel was prepared. As per the clarification, marks in optional subject in the examination at the intermediate level could not have been taken into consideration for preparing the merit list or the panel. The Appellate Tribunal has 2 noticed the aforesaid illegality in preparation of the panel in question and accordingly the appellant has been removed from the post of Panchayat Teacher. It goes without saying that it was incumbent upon the concerned authority to consider the clarification issued by the State Government in August 2006. That having not been done, the merit list was prepared on the basis of wrong norms. In our view, the respondent authorities cannot be directed to continue with such illegality. We find no merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. It goes without saying that the candidature of all concerned including that of the appellant shall be considered afresh by the authorities keeping in view the provisions of the Rules and the clarifications issued by the State Government under the Rules itself. If others have been appointed on the basis of wrong preparation of panel by committing similar illegality, the concerned authorities of the State Government shall ensure that in their cases also appropriate remedial action is taken and panels are prepared afresh without wasting time. Mkc/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)