Anjani Kumar Sharan, J. – Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The present writ application has been filed for a direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Teacher in Biology Subject in Secondary School pursuant to recommendation made by Vidayalaya Sewa Board vide Advertisement no.1/88 and 1998 under 1/95 for which special rule of appointment in the year 2013 was framed out in compliance of the different order of the Hon'ble Court.

3. The respondents may further be directed to take appointment on available posts which are vacant due to availability of reserved category non candidates and also due to non appearance and non-joining of un-reserved category candidates and the posts are lying vacant.

4. The short fact of the case is that in the year 1988, an advertisement no.1/88 was published by the Vidyalaya Sewa Board, predecessor of Bihar State Subordinate Service Commission, for appointment of 12 subject teacher in Nationalized Secondary Schools and Project Schools. The Board after selection, recommended names of selected candidates in all subjects and recommended candidates of eight subjects were appointed and they joined their respective posts. However due to one or another reasons, recommended candidates of Mathematics and Biology subjects could not be appointed by the Education Department for almost five years. In the meantime Government brought new reservation policy for appointment of teachers, as such in the year 1995, in continuance to the earlier advertisement, another advertisement no. 1/95 was published by Vidalaya Sewa Board in view of such changes. The Vidayalaya Sewa Board recommended the name of 1056 and 552 candidates in Biology and Mathematics subject on 8.10.98 and 21.5.99 respectively. Though on recommendation made by Board, all teachers recommended for different subjects were appointed, but appointment of Biology and Mathematics subjects teachers remained pending for one or another reasons. The Education Department did not issue appointment letters till the year 2000 and the petitioner is also one among selected and recommended candidates for Biology teachers by the Vidayalaya Sewa Board and is at serial no.710 of the merit list having Roll no.1379. Due to delay in issuing appointment letters, selected candidates of Biology and Mathematics subject including petitioner approached this Hon'ble Court in different writ petitions which were registered as CWJC No.2994/2000, 7732/2000, 8926/2000 and 9259/2000, 12625/2000, 3920, 752 and 3773 all of 2001. These writ petitions were allowed by order dated 15.2.2001 with observation, to calculate up-to-date vacancies and appoint within three months. The order of Hon'ble Court is reported in 2001 (2) PLJR 110.

5. The State Government being aggrieved by the order of Hon'ble Single Judge dated 15.2.2001 challenged the same in LPA No. 439, 445, 446, 447, 1347, 1354, 1360 and 1435 of 2001. The appeals filed by the State were finally dismissed on 16.12.2004 and the respondents had been directed to appoint petitioner and others as per the direction of Hon’ble Single Judge. Once again respondent State approached the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) No.6369-6376/2005 challenging the order of the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Court dated 16.12.2004. While the case was pending for hearing in appeal before Hon’ble Supreme Court, the State Government has brought changes in teachers appointment rules by introducing Panchayat Teachers appointment Rules, 2006. The respondent took ground before the Hon’ble Apex Court that appointment could not be given to the petitioner as the appointment rules got changed and now appointments are being made by Panchayati Raj under Appointment Rule 2006. Without complying the direction of the Hon’ble Court, the respondents State without keeping such number of posts vacant for the petitioner and others, had transferred all the vacant post to the panchayat Raj and subsequently more than 30