Harish Kumar, J. – Heard Mr. Y. V. Giri, learned senior counsel, duly assisted by Mr. Suneil Kumar Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Prateek Kumar Sinha, learned counsel representing the State.

2. The petitioner, who is an elected Chairman of Zila Parishad, Khagaria invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the Resolution, as contained in Letter No. 11868 dated 12.12.2022, issued under the signature of the Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Bihar, Patna addressed to all the District Magistrates of Bihar and the Chief Executive Officers of all the Zila Parishads of Bihar, whereby it has been intimated that the State Government, after having due consideration in public interest, has decided to make appointment on the basis of contract upon the sanctioned vacant posts, such as Assistant Engineer, Junior Engineer, Head Assistant, Upper Division Clerk, Clerk and Accountant of the Zila Parishad by following the guidelines by a four Members Selection Committee, constituted at the District level under the Chairmanship of the District Magistrate.

3. Further, the petitioner also seeks a direction upon the respondent authorities not to interfere with the functioning of Zila Parishad in making appointment on Ad-hoc basis from the retired employees in complete transgression of the provisions of the Bihar Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules, 1964’).

4. While assailing the impugned Resolution dated 12.12.2022, issued under the signature of the Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Bihar, Patna, the learned senior counsel submits that the same has been issued by the Principal Secretary in its capacity, as the Principal Secretary, and, as such, does not have the power to meddle with the affairs of the Zila Parishad in making appointments by transgressing the Rules, 1964, which is already in existence and mandates how appointment in the Zila Parishad is to be made. It is further submitted that the Resolution is not issued by the Government, rather has been issued under the signature of Principal Secretary.

5. Mr. Giri further submitted that the Zila Parishad is part of the local-self Government and interference of the Government also limited only to the extent that the Government has the power to appoint the Municipal Commissioner or the Chief Executive Officer, as the case may be, but the internal affairs of the local-self Government cannot be controlled or governed by the Executive Authority of the State.

6. Learned senior counsel while drawing the attention of the Court to the constitution of Committee under the impugned resolution submitted that even the Committee constituted based on which appointment on contractual basis from the retired employees are to be made, consists of State official only, which transgresses the authority of Zila Parishad in taking decision on its own, in terms of Rules, 1964 and also in terms of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 2006’). In support of his submission, he also highlighted the relevant provisions of Rules 1964 as well as as the Act, 2006. He lastly submits that if the posts are sanctioned and vacant then why appointments on merely contractual basis, what prevented the authorities to fill up the vacant sanctioned posts by regular appointment and even if Ad-hoc appointment on contractual basis are to be made, then why the same was not made by the Zila Parishad. The aforesaid Resolution dated 12.12.2022 is nothing, but a clear transgression in the power and functioning of Zila Parishad by usurpation of its power by the Executive Authority of the State.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State, while refuting the contention of the petitioner, at the threshold, objected the locus of the petitioner as to under what capacity he is assailing the impugned resolution