IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.16689 of 2009
1. SATYA NARAYAN RAM S/O LATE MISHREE RAM
R/OVILL KURUM, P.S.KADWA(BALIA BELONE), DISTT-
KATIHAR
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. THE COLLECTOR KATIHAR, DISTT- KATIHAR
3. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER
KATIHAR
4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION
KATIHAR
5. THE DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT TRIBUNAL
KATIHAR
6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER,
KADWA, DISTT- KATIHAR
7. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER KADWA,
DISTT- KATIHAR
8. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ
BIJHAARA, BLOCK KADWA, DISTT- KATIHAR
9. THE CHAIRMAN SELECTION COMMITTEE, GRAM
PANCHAYAT RAJ BIJARA BLOCK KADWA, DISTT
KATIHAR
10. ASHOK KUMAR ROY S/O DINESH CHANDRA ROY
R/OVILL BIJHARA, P.S.KADWA(BALIA BELONE)DISTT-
KATIHAR
11. SURESH ROY S/O MAHENDRA ROY R/O VILL
BIJHARA, P.S. KADWA(BALIA BELONE)DISTT-
KATIHAR
-----------
4 14/12/2010 There is some merit in the contention of learned
counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by the
Block Development Officer was after the notification
dated 25.08.2008 by virtue of which power of appeal
came to vest in the District Teachers Appointment
Appellate Authority. Proper thing for the Block
-2-
Development Officer would have been to transfer the
matter to the Appellate Authority instead of deciding the
matter himself since Rule has undergone a change and
the earlier direction of the Court could not be complied
with due to time gap between the date of decision dated
7.2.2009 and the date of notification bringing about
change in the Rule.
Irrespective of merits of contentions of the two
parties, this Court is of the opinion that prejudice has
been caused to both sides in the manner in which the
matter has come to be dealt with by the Authority at two
different times when two different orders had to be
passed, both of which became subject matter of challenge
in the two writ applications.
Since Appellate Authority is the first forum for
adjudication of facts, the Court decides to quash even
the impugned order dated 10.11.2009 contained in
annexure-3 and remits the matter back to the Appellate
Authority, Katihar who shall issue notice to both parties
i.e. the present petitioner, namely, Satya Narayan Ram
and the private respondents Kishore Kumar Roy, who is
petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 10868 of 2009 and Suresh
-3-
Roy who were supposed to be the applicants before the
Authorities for appointment. The Authority will
thereafter render its opinion on the dispute between the
parties. So far as one Ashok Kumar Roy is concerned,
who has been made party respondent no. 10 in this case,
he shows complete ignorance about his existence which
has some reflection on the dispute which too will be
looked into by the Appellate Authority because it has
some significance for the dispute in question.
This writ application is disposed of with the
direction aforesaid.
AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)