Fraud vitiates all, principles of natural justice must be upheld, fraudulent practices in the selection process invalidate appointments

1. The four petitioners were selected in 2007 as Primary Panchayat Teachers. Consequent to selection, some of the persons though who were much higher in the merit list but were not selected appealed to the Block Development Officer (B.D.O.). The Block Development Officer-cum-Appellate Authority in terms of Rule 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment and Service Condition) Rules, 2006, as it then was, called for the records of selection and appointment. He found that people who v re far above in the merit list were not appointed, instead showing them absent at the time of counseling, petitioners, who were below in the merit list were appointed. He, accordingly, set aside the appointment of the four petitioners and directed the Panchayat Samiti to re-consider the matter as per the merit list. When this matter for compliance was reported to the Panchayat Samiti, the Panchayat Samiti instead of implementing the order noticed that the petitioners were rightly appointed because all the persons above them in the merit list had failed to turn up for counseling and, as such, the Panchayat Samiti had decided to reject their applications. The Panchayat Samiti, accordingly, requested the B.D.O. for reconsidering its decision, but in the meantime it refused to implement the order of the Appellate Authority, as passed under Section 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment and Service Condition) Rules, 2006. One of the objectors who would have got the appointment then approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C. No.11581 of 2008 (Nafis Alam V/s. The State of Bihar & Ors.), which was disposed of on 9.4.2009. This Court directed the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna to immediately look into the matter and pass appropriate orders with regard to the petitioner within, four weeks. If it is found that he was wrongly denied appointment then he shall be appointed and he shall be deemed from the date he was denied appointment for the purposes of seniority. Upon this order, the Principal Secretary took up the matter and by Annexure-4D dated 31.3.2010 being memo no. 950 has revisited the entire issue. He found that firstly, the Selection Committee consisted only of Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary, which was not in accordance with the provisions. He then found that all meritorious candidates were shown to be absent in the counseling and because of that default petitioners were not given advantage, which was not correct. The Principal Secretary, thus, did not interfere with the order of the B.D.O., as passed as Appellate Authority, rather, B.D.O. had left one Punam Kumari untouched and she was also removed. The Principal Secretary finding the conduct of the Mukhiya and the Panchayat Secretary fraudulent in this respect direct prosecution against them as well. It is the original order of the B.D.O.-cum-Appellate Authority dated 14.4.2008 as well as this order of the Principal Secretary, that is, under challenge.

2. The principal ground of challenge as put forward by Shri Gajendra Kumar Jha, learned Advocate is that petitioners were duly appointed and their appointments were being cancelled. The same could not have been done without notice to them. That would be gross violation of principles of natural justice.

3. Having heard the parties and with their consent this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage itself.

4. The legal proposition as put forward by the learned counsel appearing in support of the writ petition is unexceptionable but true it is that if fraud has been perpetuated, fraud vitiates all. As has been said long back that principles of natural justice is not either a bull in the china shop nor is it an unruly horse. For this purpose, let us first examine the basic facts. I may add here that Shri Jha was far enough to produce before this Court a detailed copy of the meeting of the Selection Committee of the said Panchayat. Having perused the same, as it cam