SUDHA KUMARI v. THE STATE OF BIHAR & Ors.

1. PUNAM KUMARI, D/o Sri Brijnandan Singh, W/o Sri Ramresa Prasad Singh, resident of village-Chainpura, P.S. Warisaliganj, Distt-Nawadah 2. Kumari Ranjana, D/o Sri Banarsi Singh W/o Pramod Kumar Singh resident of village-Chainpura, P.S. Warisaliganj, Distt-Nawadah

3. Maharani Devi, D/o Sri Ganuauri Singh, W/o Sri Ram Parvesh Singh, resident of village-Dosut, P.S. Warisaliganj, Distt-Nawadah

4. Pratima Kumari, D/o Sri jairam Singh, W/o Sri Mithilesh Prasad Singh resident of village-Garua, P.S. Warisaliganj, Distt-Nawadah

5. Sri Ramashish Prasad S/o Late Chhotelal Singh resident of village- Apsarh, P.S. Warisaliganj, Distt-Nawadah ………………………………….Petitioners. Versus - 2 -

1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrate, Nawadah 3. The Director, Primary Education , Govt of Bihar, Patna 4. The Regional Deputy Director of Education ,Gaya Division, Gaya 5. The District Education Officer, Nawadah 6. The District Superintendent of Education-cum- District Programme Co- ordinator, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Nawadah

7. The Sub Divisional Officer, Nawadah 8. The Block Development Officer , Warisaliganj, Nawadah 9. The Block Education Extension Officer, Warisaliganj Block, Nawadah ………………………………..Respondents. -With- CWJC No.3223 of 2008 BIRENDRA KISHORE PATHAK, S/o Late Paras Nath Pathak , resident of Vill- Dosut, P.S. Warisaliganj, District- Nawadah ………………Petitioner. Versus

1. THE STATE OF BIHAR the Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrate, Nawadah 3. The Director, Primary Education, Govt of Bihar, Patna 4. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Gaya Division, Gaya 5. The District Education Officer, Nawadah 6. The District Superintendent of Education-cum- District Programme Co- ordinator, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Nawadah

7. The Sub Divisional Officer, Nawadah 8. The Block Development Officer , Warisaliganj, Nawadah 9. The Block Education Extension Officer, Warisaliganj Block, Nawadah …………………………Respondents. -With- CWJC No.828 of 2009 MD.MUKHTAR ALAM, S/o Mkd. Mustafa Ansari, resident of Mohalla-Bari Talab, P.O. Pakari Barawan, Police Station-Pakari Barawan, District- Nawada….Petitioner Versus

1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Department of Primary Adult Education, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Nawadah 4. Deputy Development Commissioner, Nawadah 5. District Superintendent of Education, Nawadah 6. Block Development Officer , Warisaliganj, District- Nawadah 7. Block Education Extension Officer, Warisaliganj, District-Nawadah 8. Headmaster, Urdu Prathmik Vidyalaya, Rahimganj Panchayat Dosut, P.S. Pakari Barawan, District-Nawadah

9. Gram Panchayat Raj Dosut, Police Station-Pakari Barawan, District- Nawadah, through its Secretary.

10. Panchayat Secretary , Gram Panchayat Raj Dosut, P.S. Pakari Barawan, District- Nawadah ………………………………….. Respondents. - 3 - For the petitioners: Mr. Basant Kumar Choudhary, Sr. Advocate -With- Mr. Anil Kumar Singh Mr. Amir Alam Mr. Sunil Kumar Mr. Rajesh Ranjan Kumar For the state (respondents) : Mr. Abhay Shankar Jha, S.C.-9 Mrs. Mohini Kumari, A.C. to S.C.-9 Mr. Shailendra Kr Jha, A.C. to S.C.-9 Mr. Lalan Kumar, A.C. to G.P.-=22 -----------

06.03.2009 Heard the counsels for the petitioners and the state. The order contained in Memo No. 1255 dated

06.11.2007 passed by Block Development Officer, Warisaliganj canceling selection of Panchayat Shikchak of Gram Panchayat, Dosut is under challenge in all these writ applications. Prayer of the petitioners is that the order impugned be quashed and the respondents be directed to reinstate them on the posts of Panchayat Shikchak, on which they were working and also for payment of their salary. In response to the advertisement for appointment of school teachers under Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment & service conditions) rules, 2006., petitioners applied the post of Panchayat Shikchak in different categories. Some of the petitioners applied for the posts of trained teachers and some for untrained reserved or Urdu teachers’ post. The Selection Committee on consideration of the merit and qualification of the applicants prepared a panel. Draft panel was made public as per rule 9 (KH)(vii) of 2006 rules for inviting objections. Apparently, within seven days as - 4 - provided under the rule, no objections were filed against the draft panel. As such, counseling was made and merit list was prepared for trained teachers as well as untrained teachers and the teachers to be appointed in different reserved categories. Petitioners, Pratima Kumari (in C.W.J.C. No. 1368/08) and petitioners, Poonam Kumari, Kumari Ranjana, Maharani Devi, Pratima Kumari D/o Sri Brijnandan Singh and Sri Ramashish Prasad (in C.W.J.C. No. 2625/08) and Birendra Kumar Pathak (in C.W.J.C. No. 3226/08) were appointed as trained teacher. Petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.828/09 was appointed as Urdu teacher. All petitioners were issued appointment letters and they also gave their joining at their respective places of posting. However, some objections were filed before the Block Development Officer , Warisaliganj by those persons who were not appointed. Admittedly, an ex-parte inquiry was conducted, as is apparent from the counter affidavits filed in some applications. There is an admission that notices were not issued to persons appointed in Dosut Gram Panchayat as Panchayat teachers observing process appointment under 2006 rules. It has been stated in the counter affidavit that since appointments were found to be irregular and illegal, it was not essential that notices should have been issued to those persons whose appointments were going to be cancelled. - 5 - Considering the admission in the counter affidavits regarding the violation of rule of Natural Justice, it is not required to go into the merit of the applications. The impugned order contained in Memo No. 1255 dated 06.11.2007 annexed as different annexures in these writ applications issued by the Block Development Officer, Warisaliganj cancelling appointments of the petitioners, is quashed. Supplementary affidavit has been filed by petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 1368/08. Along with interlocutory applications, an order has been annexed as Annexujre-8 to the supplementary affidavit. Annexure-8 is letter No. 79 dated

16.01.2008 issued by the Block Development Officer , Warisaliganj where it has been stated that the inquiry was conducted regard the appointment of teachers. Irregularities were found so far untrained teachers are concerned but inadvertently, whole appointments, trained as well as untrained were cancelled. The Block Development Officer has requested the District Magistrate, Nawadah for reinstatement of trained teachers. Annexure-8 is also one of the grounds for quashing the impugned orders, as it shows total non-application of mind. The petitioners have not stated anything about reinstatement of the trained teachers till now in the light of annexure-8. Reinstatement order if already not issued in favour of the petitioners who were appointed as trained teachers, it must be - 6 - issued. So far other petitioners are concerned, they will also be presumed to be continuing on their posts. If the competent authority under rule 2006 is desirous to conduct any such inquiry, he may proceed in accordance with law observing the rule of Natural Justice. Till further orders are passed, all petitioners will continue on their posts. Salary if not paid to the petitioners should be paid, they will also be deemed to be entitled for all consequential benefits. All these writ applications are allowed. AKV/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)