IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.
Md. Aslam Ali Quadri alias Md. Aslam Ali Kadri Son of Haroon Rasid Ansari – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Primary Education and ors. – Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10380 of 2019
Decided On : 08-05-2024
JUDGMENT :
Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the private respondent.
2. The petitioner has filed this writ application for issuance of an appropriate writ or direction in the nature of certiorari for setting aside order dated 01.04.2019 in Appeal No.144/2018 passed by State Appellate Authority, Patna whereby and where under order dated 08.12.2009 in Case No.674 of 2009 passed by District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Darbhanga has been quashed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction and employment of the Private Respondent (petitioner) has been cancelled and Panchayat Employment Unit has been directed to hold fresh counselling inviting appellant (respondent no.7) private respondent (petitioner) and other candidates above them in merit list intimating the date, time and venue of counselling. Petitioner also prays for an appropriate order for confirming the order dated 08.12.2009 passed by District Panchayat Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Darbhanga in Case No.674/2009.
3. The brief facts of the case is that pursuant to advertisement in the year, 2006, petitioner (Urdu) and others applied for appointment as Panchayat Teacher in Gram Panchayat, Baghouni within Baheri Panchayat. Total 14 posts of teachers were notified by advertisement out of which 10 seats were for Hindi Teacher and 4 seats were for Urdu Teacher. The respondent Panchayat prepared merit list on 30.09.2006 according to marks of applicants. Petitioner was at serial no.37 whereas private respondent was at serial no.36 having marks as 60.54% and 60.33% respectively. Respondents issued 1st panel for which counselling was done on 18.12.2006 and 20 persons including serial no.36 were called for counselling including respondent no.7. The persons who completed their counselling on 18.12.2006 were allotted school on the basis of counselling and consent on 18.12.2006. Only 6 persons turned up for certificate verification and to submit consent accordingly, they were issued joining letter on 19.12.2006. Remaining 8 seats were declared vacant and accordingly 2nd panel was prepared for 8 persons including petitioner on 10.01.2007 The petitioner was in 2nd panel and after counselling, verification of certificate and consent, respondent Panchayat issued appointment letter to the petitioner vide letter no.1 dated 16.01.2007 and accordingly, petitioner submitted joining on 16.01.2007 itself.
4. The petitioner was then transferred on 03.04.2008 to another Primary School. Thereafter, all of a sudden on 23.01.2008, respondent no.7 submitted application to respondent Block Development Officer, Baheri, who without asking show cause to petitioner and hearing him, passed order dated 04.04.2008 behind the back of the petitioner, whereby and where under selection of petitioner was cancelled and Authorities were directed to appoint respondent no.7 though the order was issued through memo no.1059 dated 08.05.2008 (annexure-3 to the writ petition).
5. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed CWJC No.10269 of 2008 challenging memo no.1059 dated 09.05.2008 and the said writ application was disposed of by this Court with liberty to approach District Appellate Authority. In view of the order dated 28.10.2009 passed in CWJC No.10269/2008, the petitioner approached the District Teachers Appellate Authority, Darbhanga through Appeal No.674/2009 and the District Appellate Authority by its order dated 08.12.2009 set aside the order dated 04.04.2008 and directed to reinstate the petitioner and petitioner was reinstated and since then, he is working.
6. The respondent no.7, then challenged the order dated 08.12.2009 before this Court through CWJC No.2162 of 2010 which was disposed of by order dated 13.11.2017 with liberty to approach the Bihar State Appellate Authority, Patna. Thereafter, the respondent no.7 filed Appeal No.144 of 2018 before the State Appellate Authority, which, by order dated 01.04.2019 allow
The District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority lacks jurisdiction to review decisions made by the Block Development Officer, reaffirming the principle of jurisdiction in employment matters.
A foundational order must be challenged for associated appellate orders to be contested; otherwise, the writ application is not maintainable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of merit in making appointments and the authority of the District Appellate Authority to direct a fresh counselling.
The court emphasized the importance of rightful appointments and the proper interpretation of court orders, highlighting the consequences of suppressing facts in legal proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the preference for a statutory appellate remedy over a judicial review under Article 226, and the inapplicability of the Rule against retrospectivi....
The reasonableness of the filing period for an appeal should be interpreted based on the specific facts of each case. Fairness and transparency are essential in the public employment process.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.