IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.5561 of 2009
Shailesh Kumar Singh & Ors .
Versus
The State Of Bihar & Ors .
-----------
5. 14.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the
State and for the Staff Selection Commission.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that they are trained Dalpaties in the District of
Rohtas. Strong reliance is placed on a communication
dated 20.9.2008 from the District Panchayat Raj
Officer at Rohtas addressed to the Director,
Panchayati Raj stating that there were 121 vacancies
for the posts of Dalpaties and 20 Dalpaties were
available for consideration. Directions were therefore
sought in that background for appointment.
Learned counsel submits that if vacancies
and eligible candidates are both available there can be
no justification for not filling up the posts. The
additional ground urged from Annexure-B to the
counter affidavit of the Circle Officer, Sasaram, is that
by letter dated 8.7.2008 the District Magistrate has
queried from the Director, Panchayati Raj with regard
to the appointments. It refers to the letter dated
11.6.2008 and the directions contained in the letter
dated 20.8.1998, that there were 531 sanctioned posts
of Panchayat Sewaks which were required to be filled
2
up, seeking directions for the course to be adopted.
Counsel for the State is unable to assist the
Court beyond what is mentioned in the counter
affidavit. The Court does not have the benefit of what
stand the Director, Panchayati Raj, proposes to take
and whether he has replied to the District Magistrate.
This administrative lapse has generated this litigation,
leaving the Court also in a state of uncertainty for lack
of proper assistance to adjudicate the matter.
It was left to the counsel for the Commission
to inform the Court that subsequently the post of
Panchayat Sewak has been abolished and replaced by
the Panchayat Secretary. Rules and regulations for
appointments of Panchayat Secretary have been
framed. He submits that there are certain orders of
this Court in 2009(4) PLJR 569 in this regard.
The Director, Panchayati Raj having failed to
render proper assistance to this Court, the following
order is passed.
Let the petitioners appear before the Director,
Panchayati Raj along with the present order. The
Director shall be obliged to give them a personal
and/or representative hearing. If the Director were to
opine that the petitioners are not entitled to relief, he
shall furnish them full materials on which he proposes
3
to deny relief. The petitioners shall be given
reasonable time to answer the same whereafter the
Director shall pass a reasoned and speaking order.
The judgment of the Court in 2009(4) PLJR 569,
needless to state has to be examined by the Director.
Let this order be complied with in its entirety
by the Director, Panchayati Raj within a maximum
period of six months from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order before him,
provided the petitioners fully co-operate. ]
The writ application stands disposed.
P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)