IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.16351 of 2009
1. BANDANA KUMARI D/O LAKHAN PRASAD SINGH R/O
VILL.- BRAHAMPUR, P.S.+DISTT.- SUPAUL
2. ADITYA KUMARI S/O RAM BAHADUR KHATVE R/O AT-
RAMPATI, P.S.- SINGHESWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA
3. NITU BHARTI D/O ASHOK KUMAR DUTTA R/O AT- PARUH
P.S.- NAUHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
4. BRAJESH KUMAR 'RANA' S/O AJIT RANA R/O AT+P.O.-
DHARAMPUR, P.S. NAUHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
5. NILAM KUMARI D/O BHAGESHWAR PASWAN R/O AT+P.O.-
DUHLA, P.S. SONBARSA KACHARI, DISTT.- SAHARSA
6. VINDAWASHNI KUMARI D/O CHATAWANDRA NARAYAN
SINGH R/O VILL.+P.O.- DHARAMPUR, P.S. NAUHATTA,
DISTT.- SAHARSA
7. PRAMOD KUMAR S/O BHAGWAT YADAV R/O AT+P.O.-
VIJAIPUR, P.S. BIHARA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
8. MD. SALLAHA UDDIN S/O MD. MUSHLIM AT- ITAHARI, P.O.-
KATTYA, P.S.+DISTT.- SUPAUL
9. NARESH KUMAR YADAV S/O KISTO PRASAD YADAV AT-
SAPTIYAHI, P.O. SISAI, AGAWANPUR, P.S.+DISTT.-
SAHARSA
10. MINA KUMARI D/O SATYA NARAYN YADAV AT-
PURUSHOTAMPUR, P.O.- DUMARA, P.S. NAUHATTA, DISTT.-
SAHARSA
11. SANGITA KUMARI D/O RAM NATH PASWAN AT+P.O.-
BASBITTI, P.S.+DISTT.- SUPAUL
12. MANJU KUMARI D/O JIVACHH PRASAD AT- CHATRA, P.O.
DHARAMPUR, P.S.- NAUHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
13. KALYAN KUMAR S/O AJIT KUMAR SINGH AT+P.O.-
BIRATPUR, P.S. SONBARSA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
14. MAMTA VERMA D/O HIRENDRA KUMAR VERMA AT+P.O.-
DUMARA, P.S. NAUHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
15. GEETA KUMARI D/O DEO NARAYAN SHARMA, W/O
ADITYA KUMAR AT- RAMPATTI, P.O.+P.S.- SINGHESHWAR,
DISTT.- MADHEPURA
16. RINKU KUMARI D/O VISHWANATH PRASAD SINGH
AT+P.O.- MAINNA, P.S.- MANISHI, DISTT.- SAHARSA
17. SANDIP KUMAR S/O SHYAM SUNDRA SHARMA AT-
SAINITOLA, P.O.+P.S.- SIMARI BAKHTIYARPUR, DISTT.-
SAHARSA
18. SUMIT RANJAN S/O DEO NARAYAN YADAV AT-
SAINITOLA, P.O.+P.S. SIMRI BAKHTYARPUR, DISTT.-
SAHARSA
19. ARBINDA KUMAR S/O RAJENDRA SHARMA AT-
KASTHTOLA, WARD NO. 28, P.S.+ DISTT.- SAHARSA
20. LALAN PASWAN S/O MAHENDRA PASWAN AT+P.O.-
DUDHAILA, P.S. SONBARSA KACHAHARI, DISTT.- SAHARSA
21. PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH S/O CHANDRIKA PRASAD SINGH
AT+P.O.- MAINNA, P.S.- MAHISHI, DISTT.- SAHARSA
-2-
22. DEJI KUMARI D/O DINESH PRASAD YADAV AT- RAUTTA,
P.O. KHAUJRHA, P.S. SONBARSA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
23. KIRTI AZAD S/O UPENDRA THAKUR AT- KALUHA, P.S.
SHANKARPUR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA
24. VIJAY KUMAR SINGH S/O SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH AT+P.O.-
BARUARI, P.S.+DISTT.- SUPAUL
25. RASHMI KUMARI D/O RAMESH VERMA AT- PRUHAR, P.O.
DUMARA, P.S. NAUHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
26. SAPANA KUMARI D/O PRIYAWARAT GUPTA AT+P.O.
BARIYAHI BAZAR, P.S.- BANGAW, DISTT.- SAHARSA
27. PUNITA KUMARI D/O HIRALAL YADAV AT+P.O. SATTAR,
P.S. BIHARA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
28. MD. IDRISH ALAM S/O MD. MAJLUMHUSHAN AT- SIHAI,
P.O. BAKAUR, P.S.+DISTT.- SUPAUL
29. NILU VERMA H/O ASHOKA KUMAR VERMA, AT+P.O.
DUMARA, P.S. NAUHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
30. NAMRATA PRIYADARSHI D/O BINDISHWARI SAHA
AT+P.O.- DUMARA, P.S. NAUHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
31. JAGNNATH KUMAR S/O SHIVNANDAN MANDAL AT+P.O.
MOHANIA, P.S.+DISTT.- SUPAUL
32. SHIKHA RANI D/O YOGAL KISHOR DAS AT- PARUHAR, P.O.
DUMARA, P.S. NAUHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
33. VIJAY TANTI S/O DASHRATH TANTI AT+P.O. PARI, P.S.
BANGANU, DISTT.- SAHARSA
34. GANESH NANDAN PASI S/O SARYUG PASI AT+P.O. SIHOL,
P.S.- BIHARA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
35. RAGHUNI CHAUDHARI S/O SITO CHAUDHARI AT-
KAMALPUR, P.O.- BARIYAHI, P.S. BANGANU, DISTT.-
SAHARSA
36. BINA KUMARI H/O SACCHIDANAND YADAV, AT-
KAYASTHA TOLA, WARD NO. 29, P.S.+DISTT.- SAHARSA
37. BANTI KUMAR S/O DINESH PRASAD YADAV AT- RAUTTA,
P.O. KHAUJRHA, P.S. SONBARSA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
38. PUNAM KUMARI D/O RAMPRAWESH CHAUDHARI AT-
SOSUNA, P.O. BELAVARISH, P.S. GOH, DISTT.-
AURANGABAD
39. SANJAY RAJAK S/O LATE SATYANARAYAN RAJAK
AT+P.O.- BARAIYAHI, P.S. BANGANU, DISTT.- SAHARSA
40. USHA KUMARI D/O LATE HARI NARAYAN KAMATI AT-
PARUHAR, P.O. DUMARA, P.S. NAUHATTA, DISTT.-
SAHARSA.
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES
DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA
3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, HUMAN
RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR,
PATNA
4. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, HUMAN RESOURCES
DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., SAHARSA.
-3-
5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SAHARSA
6. THE DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT APPELLATE
AUTHORITY, SAHARSA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN
7. THE MEMBER, THE DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT
APPELLATE AUTHORITY, DISTT.- SAHARSA
8. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, DISTT.-
SAHARSA
9. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SADAR SAHARSA, DISTT.-
SAHARSA
10. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BLOCK- NAUHATTA,
DISTT.- SAHARSA
11. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, BLOCK-
NAUTHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
12. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ
KASIMPUR, BLOCK- NAUHATTA, SAHARSA
13. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ KASIMPUR,
BLOCK- NAUHATTA, DISTT.- SAHARSA
14. SINKO KUMAR SINHA S/O UPENDRA PRASAD SINHA R/O
OLD JAIL, BATRAHA ROAD, WARD NO. 22, DISTT.-
SAHARSA
-----------
For the Petitioners : M/s Rajendra Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv.,
Rajeev Kr. Singh, Nawal Kishore Singh,
& Onkar Kumar, Advs.
For the Respondent No.14 : M/s Basant Kr. Choudhary, Sr. Adv. &
Pramod Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the State : G.A.-I.
-----------
04 26.08.2010 The petitioners have preferred this writ petition against
the order dated 27.10.2009 passed by the District Teacher
Appointment Appellate Authority, Saharsa (Annexure-1). By the said
order, the Tribunal has disposed of 22 applications filed before it by
various persons, who were challenging the selection and appointment
of Teachers as was done in the year 2006.
The Mukhiya, namely, Dilip Sada has appeared and
contested this writ petition. He states that the Tribunal had rightly
interfered and set aside all appointments and rightly held that in fact
there was hardly any selection and all was mere paper book.
On the other hand, Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned
-4-
Senior Counsel appearing in support of the writ petition submits that
for the said selection there was a counselling done. In that counselling
there were large scale irregularity, the Collector of the district got the
matter enquired into and cancelled all the counselling in the entire
district of various Panchayats including this Panchayat. He ordered
fresh counselling and preparation of merit list under supervision of
independent observer as appointed by him. He points out that all
Mukhiyas in protest against this action of the Collector decided to
abstain from the selection process. Mukhiya not being available, the
Up-Mukhiya presided over the selection process. The Panchayat
Secretary was a member as well. The selection process was duly done
and petitioners were appointed. All this was in early part of 2007. No
one including the Mukhiya protested and persuade the matter before
any authority much less the statutory authority under Rule-18 being
the Block Development Officer at that time. Rule-18 as it existed then
provided for a limitation of 30 days to file appeal before the Block
Development Officer. No such appeals were filed. Ultimately, when
Rule-18 was amended and Tribunals were constituted after more than
1½ years individual appeals were filed making individual grievances.
No appeal was filed by the Mukhiya again though Mukhiya has turned
up before this Court to support the order of the Tribunal in cancelling
the selection process. Mr. Singh further submits that even though the
order of the Tribunal is unsustainable on facts, the order cannot be
sustained as it does take into account the aspect of limitation in
preferring the appeal. He further submits that mere notice to parties
-5-
who are likely to be adversely affected is not enough, the parties must
be given all papers and documents on which any party seek to rely.
There must be proper hearing and parties must be given opportunity to
file rejoinders and argue their individual cases. Nothing like this was
done. Thus, he submits that petitioners were denied proper
opportunity to defend their case.
Having heard Mr. Basant Kumar Choudhary, Mr.
Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsels and learned counsel
for the State, in my view, it is a fit case in which the matter must be
remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration after setting aside the
order of the Tribunal dated 27.10.2009. The Tribunal would take up
each case individually and notice the parties involved therein. The
Tribunal is there in terms of Section-18 as a Tribunal to resolve lis
inter-party and not as a Court of inherent jurisdiction to deal with
matters in public interest. It is only individual disputes as and when
raised to the extent raised that can be decided. This must be kept in
mind by the Tribunal. The Tribunal must make over copies of the
applications filed by various persons to their contesting respondents
who are made parties therein. The Tribunal would then hear the
parties and decide the cases in respect of enough reliefs as sought by
them. As petitioners are aware of this order they would file a copy of
this order before the Tribunal within two weeks. The Tribunal would
then fix a date not later than one month and notice the appellants. In
the meantime, the Tribunal would comply with the procedural
requirements, as noted above, then hear all the parties and decide the
-6-
matter. It is expected that the Tribunal would finally dispose of the
matter within three months from the date of production of a copy of
this order before the Tribunal.
With these observations, the writ petition stands
disposed of.
Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)