JUDGMENT :

The petitioners by way of this writ petition assail the order passed by the District Appellate Authority, Sitamarhi dated 13.02.2018 whereby their appeal was rejected and the order passed by the Block Education Officer dated 28.01.2017 and the orders of the District Programme Officer dated 27.02.2016 and 29.02.2016 were upheld.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners had participated in a selection process for appointment as Panchayat Teachers for Gram Panchayat, Parsandi, in the Panchayat Teachers Selection Process, 2008. They were placed in the select list and the select list was forwarded by the Panchayat Secretary to the District Education Officer, Sitamarhi vide its letter dated 31.12.2010. The said select list was however not operative upon and litigation in this regard ensued in different districts. The similarly situated persons approached the District Appellate Authority, Sitamarhi in appeals which came to be decided on 21.11.2014 and the District Appellate Authority after reaching to the conclusion that the posts are lying vacant and there is no fault in the selection process, proceeded to direct similarly situated persons to be offered employment. The petitioners who were also considered and employment was offered to them vide order dated 28.02.2016. The petitioners joined on the post of Panchayat Teachers in the pay-scale of Rs. 5200-20200. However, the petitioners were not released salary in terms of order issued by the Block Development Officer order dated 28.01.2017 which resulted in filing of appeals before the District Appellate Authority, Sitamarhi claiming salary for the period. Learned counsel submits that instead of adjudicating upon the said aspect, the District Appellate Authority proceeded to examine the appointment given to the petitioners and proceeded vide impunged order dated 13.02.2018 to hold that the appointment given to the petitioners was void ab initio. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners preferred appeal before the State Appellate Authority which was dismissed vide impugned order dated 01.11.2018. Thereafter, the petitioners have approached this Court.

3. Learned counsel submits that the District Appellate Authority, Sitamarhi has gone beyond its jurisdiction to cancel the appointment of the petitioners and declared wrongfully as void ab initio. It is further submitted that the prior sanction for offering appointment to the petitioners, was an internal process, for which, the petitioners cannot be held responsible. Moreover, the order dated 17.05.2016 issued by the Director, Elementary Education, Bihar could not have been relied upon to set aside the order of D.P.O dated 18.02.2016 as the order of Director is later in point of time. He also submits that the appointment issued to the petitioners was by a competent person, namely, The Panchayat Secretary of the Gram Panchayat which was done after following due procedure of advertisement of posts.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State supports the order passed by the District Appellate Authority as well as by the State Appellate Authority and submits that the prior sanction was required from the department secretariat and the District Programme Officer has no authority to proceed and direct the units to give appointment. Learned counsel thus, submits that the decision taken by the District Appellate Authority declaring the appointment of the petitioners as void ab initio does not warrant any interference.

5. Learned counsel submitted that the appointment should be done up-to 31.12.2010 and the Gram Panchayat, Parsandi has sent the list on the said date only, therefore, the said list could not have been made operative by the District Programme Officer.

6. Considering the submissions, this Court find that the District Appellate Authority was seized of the issue raised by the petitioners-appellants regarding their non-payment of salary. In a case where the demand has been