IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13709 of 2007 ASHA RANI, wife of Shri Shashi Bhushan Kumar, resident of village Imjapur, Post Sheo Kund, District Munger, presently Assistant Teacher, Arya Kanya Uchcha Vidyalaya, Khagadiya ... Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Bihar Karamchari Chayan Ayog, Post Veterinary College, Patna-14 3. The District Education Officer, Munger 4. The Secretary, School Managing Committee, Arya Kanya Uchcha Vidyalaya Khagadia, District Munger ... Respondents ----------- 2. 28.9.2010 Learned counsel for the petitioner as with regard to the following relief: “This application is being filed for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the order dated 18th of January, 2007 (Annexure 7), communicated by the Secretary, Bihar Karamchary Chayan Ayog, Patna by which the recommendation for appointment of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher has been turned down by the Bihar Karamchari Chayan Ayog.” would submit that the two reasons given for not according approval to the services of the petitioner in the impugned order dated 18.1.2007 are based on non-est and non- existing materials. In this context he would submit that the Karamchari Chayan Ayog 2 itself had notified the name of the newspapers in which the advertisement has to be made by the Managing Committee of minority schools for filling up the post of teachers and one among 15 of them is also "Pratah Kamal, Hindi (Muzaffarpur)" and therefore, when the appointment of the petitioner was also made after publication of advertisement in the said newspaper "Pratah Kamal" the first reason for rejecting the case of approval of the petitioner must be deemed to be based on non-est material. In the opinion of this Court the appointment of the petitioner having been made in the year 2004 and the said Commission’s order issuing list of 15 newspaper being dated 12th March, 2005 it cannot be said with certainty that the Commission had also earlier accepted the said newspaper Pratah Kamal as one of the leading newspaper in which the advertisement ought to have been issued by the Minority School for filing up the post of teacher. None-the-less as there is also nothing to show that prior to 12th March, 2005 any list 3 of newspaper was issued by the Aayog or Government prescribing particular newspaper to be valid for publication of advertisement and subsequently Pratah Kamal has been held to be one of 15 newspapers in which such advertisement could be issued, this Court would hold that the Aayog is under obligation to reconsider its decision as with regard to grant of approval of the petitioner. In this context the second reason given by the Aayog for not approving the services of the petitioner also seems to be shifting of onus on the petitioner which could have never been fulfilled by her. In this context the finding of the Aayog is that the school of the petitioner in which her appointment did not appear to be a minority declared school by the State Government. Admittedly the school of the petitioner is a High School for which an order of declaring minority institution has to be passed by the State Government and therefore, it was open for the Aayog to seek a report from the concerned officials of State Government as with regard to the 4 status of the school of the petitioner even by directing the District Education Officer, the recommending authority, to make a full enquiry and submit his report to the Aayog as with regard to status of the minority school of the petitioner. The petitioner being a teacher appointed in such minority school could not have by herself produced the order declaring the institution as a minority institution and therefore, if her case was being rejected she ought to have been a given specific notice by the Aayog for producing the information or any document before rejecting her approval of appointment in the minority school. Admittedly that was never done by the Aayog. In that view of the matter, this Court would set aside the impugned order, as contained in Annexure 7, and remit the matter back to the Bihar Karamchari Chayan Aayog to reconsider the case of grant of approval of the petitioner strictly in accordance with section 18 of the Bihar Non- Government Taking Over Management and Control Act, 1981 within a period of six months from the date of receipt/ production 5 of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid observation and direction this writ application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/