SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.:–Heard the parties.

2. Considering the nature and urgency the issued involved in the case, arguments were heard at the initial stage itself. Learned Government Advocate was also agreed to submit his arguments orally.

3. The short point involved in the present matter is as to whether the State Appellant Authority can hear and decide an application filed directly to it for redressal of grievance of an employee in terms of Bihar State Teaching Institutions Teachers and Employee (Dispute Redressal And Appeal) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 2020).

4. The brief facts which require to be noted that the petitioner Priyanka Kumari filed an application under Rule 14 (A) read with 14 (B) of the Rules of 2020 before the State Appellate Authority seeking redressal of her grievance of extension of all due benefits of order of reinstatement. The State Appellate Authority did not register the case on the basis of an objection raised by their office that the application is not maintainable before it directly. The case was heard on the objections and the State Appellate Authority has held as under:—

“We thus hold that under the scheme of the 2020 Rules this Court has been constituted as the Appellant Forum/Authority. If any dispute is filed directly before this court and entertained and the lis is decided the litigants will lose the forum of an appeal as provided under 2020 Rules which is not the intent of the Rules.

We accordingly uphold the objection raised by the office and hold the present application/appeal not maintainable before this Court.”

The writ petition has thus been preferred before this Court.

5. Learned counsel submits that this Court vide order dated 23.02.2022, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5489 of 2020 (Suresh Ram Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.) had directed that the District Appellate Authority shall adjudicate the disputes on merits and if, there is any grievance further, the parties would be entitled to take up the matter before the State Appellate Authority. In Review Petition C.W.J.C. No. 34 of 2022 (Minakshi @ Sushre Minakshi & Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), it was held as under:—

“2. It is informed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the State Appellate Authority is not entertaining the petition directly on the ground that it is an appellate forum. It is also informed that the State Government has not formed the District Appellate Authority in several districts and the District Appellate Authorities are non-functional. It goes without saying that the very purpose of the Rules of 2020 is to provide alternative and efficacious remedy to the teachers for quick redressal of their grievances relating to their services. In circumstances where the District Appellate Authority do not function or the same has not been formed by the State Government, the State Appellate Authority which is the extension of the adjudicating Authority powers given to the District Appellate Authority, can not wash its hands off such cases where the concerned teachers have approached directly the State Appellate Authority for redressal of his/her grievance in situations on account of the District Appellate Authority being non-functioning.

3. The concerned litigants will of-course have to file an affidavit to the effect that the District Appellate Authority is not functioning.”

6. Learned counsel submits that in spite of the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the State Appellate Authority is not entertaining any application directly and their office is also not registering the applications. He further assail the order passed by the State Appellate Authority and submits that the reasoning adjudicated by the State Appellate Authority goes contrary to the Judgment passed by this Court and is otherwise also erroneous.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the State has assisted the Court and fairly and candidly stated that after going through the Rules, the provision of Rule 14 of the Rules 2020 and the Judgment pas