SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.:–The petitioner by way of this writ petition assails the order passed by the State Appellate Authority dated 17.05.2019, whereby the order passed by the District Teacher’s Employment Appellate Authority dated 28.12.2013 has been set aside and further order dated 17.10.2014 by which the petitioner’s appointment has been cancelled with the further direction that the respondent no.8 shall be restored to the post where he was working prior to the passing of the order of appointment of the petitioner. It has been further directed to the Panchayat Secretary to pay the arrears of honorarium and salary to the respondent.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the respondent no.8 who was the appellant before the State Appellate Authority, was found to be not included in the final merit list prepared on 08.11.2006. There were two inquiries conducted with regard to final merit list and the enquiry report of Area Education Officer dated 24.09.2008 and of the Block Education Officer dated 26.09.2008 have found that the final merit list dated 08.11.2006 did not have the name of the respondent no.8. It has also been found that the merit list dated 30.11.2006 was followed, wherein the name of the respondent no.8 has been shown.

3. The brief facts which requires to be mentioned for adjudicating the present petition are that in response to an advertisement inviting application for employment as Panchayat Teacher at gram Panchayat, Bela Simari on 27.08.2006 under the rules of 2006, the respondent no.8 claims to have applied as a handicapped candidate under E.B.C. quota. The petitioner too has applied. There were 11 vacancies, out of which 3 posts for unreserved female and two post were reserved for E.B.C. and one post was reserved for E.B.C. female, SC female and BC female candidate respectively. Out of 11 post two post were for Urdu teacher and remaining for general teachers.

4. As per the Panchayat Secretary, a merit list was prepared on 08.10.2006 wherein there were 166 candidates and it appears that there was another merit list prepared on 30.11.2006, wherein there were 171 candidates. It is stated by the Panchayat Secretary that the merit list dated 30.11.2006 was a forged one.

5. Respondent no.8 preferred an appeal before the District Teachers Employment Authority stating therein that he was selected and appointed in the first phase of teachers employment on 04.12.2006 as a Panchayat Teacher and was also paid honorarium from that day. However, from July, 2008 his honorarium was stopped. He, therefore, preferred an appeal to the District Teachers Employment Authority, Khagaria to direct them to make payment of his honorarium.

6. Panchayat Secretary appeared and did not file his reply to the allegations and stated that he does not possess the record of the recruitment before the appellate authority. However, it has been recorded by the District Appellate Authority that the Panchayat Secretary orally submitted the then Panchayat Secretary had made appointment of the respondent no.8 by creating false and forged merit list. On a complain received of some persons, enquiry was conducted and appointment of the respondent no.8 was found to be illegal as his name was missing in the original merit list prepared and signed on 08.11.2006. The District Appellate Authority found that there were two merit list prepared on 08.11.2006 and 30.11.2006 and on the basis of merit list dated 30.11.2006 the respondent joined on the post. If found the list dated 30.11.2006 to be doubtful and that it was brought into existence to appoint the respondent no.8. It therefore, directed to fill up the vacancy as per roster from male, female candidate of E.B.C.

7. Respondent no.8 preferred an appeal before the State Appellate Authority who has taken a view that the order of dispensed with the services of the respondent no.8 dated 20.12.2013 was not justified. It has been further observed that the respondent no.8 had higher academic qu