IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16641 of 2009 1. SAROJ KUMARI D/O RAM BRIKSH PRASAD NIRALA AND W/O KRISHNA PRASAD R/O VILL.- SALAIYA KHURD, P.S.- FATEHPUR, DISTT.- GAYA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY - CUM - COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY - CUM - COMMISSIONER PANCHAYATI RAJ DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATI RAJ DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER BLOCK- FATEHPUR, DISTT.- GAYA 7. THE SARPANCH PANCHAYAT- SALAIYA KALA, BLOCK - FATEHPUR, DISTT.- GAYA ----------- 3 26.3.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. Petitioner’s prayer is for quashing of part of the order contained in letter no. 714 dated 31.8.2004, issued by Block Development Officer, Fatehpur. This order has been issued in the light of amended Rule 5(Ka) (ii) of the Bihar Gram Kachahri Secretary (Appointment, Service Condition & Duty) Rules, 2007. Petitioner’s apprehension is that, he may be terminated from the post of Secretary, Gram Kachahari, since amendment has been brought with retrospective effect Petitioner was appointed on the post of 2 Secretary, Gram Kachahari under the provisions of Bihar Gram Kachahari Secretary (Appointment, Service Condition & Duty) Rules, 2007. Rule 5(ka) (ii) provides the qualification for appointment on the post of Secretary, Gram Kachahari. In 2007 Rules, there was no provision for treating Madhyama degree equivalent to matriculation, as such several persons, who had Madhyama degree were not considered for appointment, though had higher marks. Subsequently, it was challenged by filing CWJC No. 13905 of 2007, where it was held that in view of Government Policy dated 11.1.1999 the qualification of Madhyama degree is equivalent to matriculation and candidates having madhyama degree, could not have been denied consideration for their appointments on the post of Secretary, Gram Kachahari. In the light of the order passed in CWJC No. 13905 of 2007 amendment was brought in Rule 5(ka) (ii) of Bihar Gram Kachahari Secretary (Appointment and Service Condition) Rules, 2007, with retrospective effect. Considering the amendment brought in the Rule 3 with retrospective effect, the Block Development Officer, Fatehpur at Gaya has issued impugned order, directing to terminate services of such candidates, who were appointed ignoring the candidature of persons having Madhyama degree, with higher marks. Counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention towards an order passed by the High Court in similar matter, in the case of Sanjay Das vs. State of Bihar (2009(4) PLJR 1034), similar issue was under consideration, in this case and in Para 13 of the order, a finding has been recorded that the issue decided in CWJC No. 13905 of 2007 do not concern appointments already made. It means that persons, already appointed under the provisions of 2007 Rules, shall not be affected on account of amendment brought in the rules with retrospective effect, such appointments cannot be terminated, despite the fact that amendment has been brought with retrospective effect. Application of amendment will be prospective; so far appointments already made are concerned. Petitioner’s case is fully covered with the 4 findings recorded in the reported decision i.e. 2009(4) PLJR 1034 (Sanjay Das Vs. State of Bihar). A direction is being issued to the Block Development Officer, Fatehpur, Gaya and other respondents not to reconsider the direction contained in letter No. 714 dated 31.8.2009. Persons like petitioner and others, who have already appointed, cannot be terminated from their posts in the light of the amended Rule 5(ka) (ii) of 2007 Rules. (Mridula Mishra,J.) A.kumar