JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH

Heard the parties in both the appeals.

2. On behalf of appellants the order under appeal dated 23.4.2012 has been challenged mainly on the ground that the learned Writ Court did not consider the individual defence of the appellants as to whether their appointment could be saved on account of marks obtained by them in their respective categories. A plea was also raised that the learned Single Judge has not appreciated that no document was available to show proper notice to the appellants for appearing before the Tribunal. Lastly it was submitted that Rule 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’) was amended in 2008 with effect from 25.8.2008 and hence the Tribunal under the amended Rule 18 will have no jurisdiction in relation to a dispute arising out of appointment made earlier. Related to this issue there was a further submission that before the amendment in Rule 18, Block Development Officers were competent authority to decide such disputes/appeals and hence a dispute earlier decided by the Block Development Officer could not have been reconsidered and reope