IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.15300 of 2010
1. LAXMI KUMARI W/O RAMESH KUMAR R/O VILL
RAHATPUR, P.O.RAM NAGAR, P.S.SURYAGARHA, BLOCK-
PIPARIA, DISTT-LAKHISARAI
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA
2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE LAKHISARAI
3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION
LAKHISARAI
4. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER PIPARIA,
DISTT-LAKHISARAI
5. THE MUKHIYA , GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ SAIDPURA,
BLOCK-PIPARIA, DISTT-LAKHISARAI
6. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ
SAIDPURA, BLOCK-PIPARIA, DISTT-LAKHISARAI
7. THE MEMBER , DISTRICT TEACHER'S APPOINTMENT
APPELLATE AUTHORITY LAKHISARAI
-----------
02. 29.4.2011 Obviously lack of expertise and exposure to judicial
work, which is lacking in the Member of District Teachers
Employment Appellate Authority, is visible on the various
orders which have been brought on record by the petitioner.
Annexure-2 is an order dated 2.3.2009 directing the Panchayat
secretary to hold a counselling of the petitioner. How such an
order or direction could be given even without adjudication on
the issue is not understood. That is the first infirmity which the
Court notices. Then there is an order contained in Annexure-6,
which is dated 9.7.2009. In this order merit list was quashed and
a direction was given not to proceed with the matter. Thereafter
a third order, which is Annexure-7, dated 12.8.2009 has been
passed which, according to the petitioner, is a recall of the
earlier order dated 9.7.2009 and dismissal of the case of the
2
petitioner giving liberty to Panchayat to proceed with the
appointment/selection. The Court wanted to express its opinion
in the conduct of such proceeding by the concerned Member but
keeping the dignity of the tribunal and the quasi judicial
authority, the Court only observes that the Member has a lot of
training and weeding to be done to understand the
responsibility in which he has been placed. He is no longer an
administrative authority who is exercising powers by recording
his opinions in a file. He was an officer of the State
Government before his appointment but now is a Member of the
appellate authority. In a judicial order adjudication is yet
another cup of tea.
In the totality, therefore, both Annexures 6 and 7
are quashed. Matter is remitted back to the appellate authority
that he shall now hear the petitioner again, issue notice to the
concerned respondent as well and after verifying the records will
pass a clear and categorical order irrespective of the order he has
passed in the past without being influenced by such orders
because per say this Court expresses unhappiness in the manner
in which this proceeding has been conducted.
Writ is allowed.
rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)