IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11278 of 2009 MUNNI DEVI, WIFE OF RANJIT KUMAR PRAJAPATI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DILAWARPUR, P.O., P.S. AND ANCHAL BIHTA, DISTRICT PATNA---PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE DIRECTOR, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DIRECTOR, BIHAR PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATNA. 5. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT RAJ OFFICER, PATNA. 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BIHTA, PATNA. 7. THE BLOCK PANCHAYAT RAJ OFFICER, BIHTA, PATNA. 8. THE SARPANCH, GRAM PANCHAYAT DAYALPUR DAULATPUR, VILLAGE DILAWARPUR, P.O., P.S. AND ANCHAL BIHATA, DISTRICT PATNA. 9. SMT. KATYANTI DEVI ATHARVA WIFE OF PRANAV KUMAR, RESIDENT OF GRAM PANCHAYAT DAYALPUR DAULATPUR, VILLAGE DILAWARPUR, P.O., P.S. AND ANCHAL BIHTA, DISTRICT PATNA----RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02. 02.09.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner was earlier appointed as Secretary, Gram Kutchery, Dayalpur Daulatpur Gram Panchayat within Bihta block in the district of Patna. Her appointment has been cancelled by the Block Development Officer, Bihta under order bearing No. 1172 dated 10.7.2009, Annexure-5. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the order dated 10.7.2009, Annexure-5 is in teeth of the provisions contained in the Bihar Gram Kutchery Secretary(Employment Service Conditions and Duties) Rules, 2007, in terms whereof it is the Sub-Divisional Officer who had the jurisdiction to consider the challenge or legality of the appointment made on the post of Secretary, Gram Kutchery but ignoring such provision the Block Development, Officer, Bihta has set aside the appointment of the petitioner under order dated 10.7.2009 without notice to her and the order being without jurisdiction this Court should interfere in the matter at this stage itself. - 2 - 4. I regret not to accept such submission. The order may be without jurisdiction but petitioner has a remedy before the Sub- Divisional Officer, Bihta. Accordingly, I direct the petitioner to assail order dated 10.7.2009, Annexure-5 before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bihta by filing representation against the said order, which should be considered by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bihta in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt of the representation along with a copy of this order. It goes without saying that if any appointment made on the post from which petitioner has been removed shall be subject to the result of the representation filed by the petitioner. 5. It is further submitted that petitioner has not been paid the honorarium for the period between January, 2009 till the date of passing of the impugned order. If that be so then the petitioner be paid honorarium for the period between January, 2009 till the date of passing of the impugned order. In case the challenge of the petitioner against the impugned order succeeds then the question of payment for subsequent period shall be considered by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bihta. 6. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)