2025 Supreme(Pat) 64

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN, J.
CWJC Nos. 16170, 335, 7455,7956, 8092, 10955, 11380, 12923,15093, 15450, 15766, 16673, 17728,18081 of 2022 with 908, 1037, 1116, 1120, 1124, 4554, 7405, 9405, 10139, 10732, 13526, 16458, 17645, 17679, 17762, 18173, 18315, 18362, 18409 of 2023 and 436, 1001, 1280, 3103, 3178, 3883, 4140, 4160, 4178, 4496, 5932, 8696, 9044, 9061, 9062, 1000110844, 11137, 11461, 11855, 11891, 12183, 12528, 12608, 12726, 12965
of 2024
(7.3.2025)
Kamini Kumari (in 16170)
Sant Kumar Prasad (in 335)
Sita Devi & Anr. (in 7455)
Bimla Prasad (in 7956)
Praveen Kumar Shahi (in 8092)
Sunil Kumar Yadav (in 10955)
Sudhir Kumar (in 11380)
Noorain (in 12923)
Vyas Kumar Singh (in 15093)
Kanhaiya Kumar Paswan @ Kanhaiya Kumar Pasban
(in 15450)
Amire Azam (in 15766)
Rinki Kumari (in 16673)
Sujit Kumar Singh (in 17728)
Puja Kumari (in 18081)
Kameshwar Prasad Yadav (in 908)
Kiran Kumari (in 1037)
Kumari Anamika Singh (in 1116)
Meera Kumari @ Mira Kumari (in 1120)
Arjun Kumar Thakur (in 1124)
Ranjana Kumari & Ors. (in 4554)
Amit Kumar (in 7405)
Ajay Kumar Anand (in 9405)
Madhuri Kumari (in 10139)
Niku (in 10732)
Sharwan Kumar (in 13526)
Mamta Kumari @ Mamata Kumari
(in 16458)
Rina Kumari (in 17645)
Shyamli @ Shyamali (in 17679)
Babita Kumari (in 17762)
Sarita Kumari @ Sarita Devi
Prem Kumar Prasad & Ors.
(in 18173)
Fulmati Shaw (in 18315)
Jamila Khatoon @ Jamila Khatun
(in 18362)
Sunil Kumar Singh (in 18409)
Arjun Kumar & Ors. (in 436)
Murshid Alam (in 1001)
Kumari Annu Tiwari
@ Kumari Anu Tiwari (in 1280)
Anil Kumar Srivastva (in 3103)
Rajesh Kumar Singh (in 3178)
Ganesh Kumar Singh (in 3883)
Ramta Prasad (in 4140)
Ragini Kumari (in 4160)
Sumitra Kumari & Anr. (in 4178)
Anchal Kumari (in 4496)
Amarjeet Kumar Hari Narayan
Shah & Ors. (in 5932)
Jairam Rajak & Anr. (in 8696)
Priyanka Kumari (in 9044)
Prem Prakash Dubey (in 9061)
Ramita Kumari (in 9062)
Bharosha Kumari @ Bharosa Kumari
& Ors. (in 10001)
Kumari Sudha Yadav & Ors.
(in 10844)
Rajnish Kr. Bhargav & Ors.
(in 11137)
Puja Kumari (in 11461)
Baby Kumari & Ors. (in 11855)
Gyan Prakash Singh & Ors. (in 11891)
Pintu Kumar Rai (in 12183)
Amit Kumar Sinha & Ors. (in 12528)
Gyanti Kumari & Ors. (in 12608)
Priyanka Singh & Anr. (in 12726)
Pratima Kumari & Ors. (in 12965)
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. .... Respondents
(in all)

Headnote:

Service Law – Appointment of petitioners as Panchayat Teachers – The recruitment process for the first phase and second phases of 2006 and 2008 appointment was conclusively completed by the year 2010, with a categorical directive from the higher authorities that no further appointments were to be made after 31.12.2010 and that any remaining vacancies were to be carried forward to the next phase of recruitment – Consequently, all further appointments for the post of Panchayat Teacher were discontinued – Undisputedly, the petitioners approached the District Appellate Authority only after the closure of both the first and second phases of the recruitment process – Furthermore, it is an admitted fact that the petitioners were not appointed to the said post by December 2010 – Moreover, any vacancies that arose in February 2012 would be categorized as further vacancies and could not be considered under the concluded phases of the recruitment phases as it is a well settled principle of law and upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court that, "it is a settled legal proposition that vacancies cannot be filled up over and above the number of vacancies advertised as "The recruitment of the candidates in excess of the notified vacancies is a denial and deprivation of the Constitutional right under Article 16(1) of the Constitution ………filling up the vacancies own the notified vacancies amounts to filling up of further vacancies and thus not permissible in law" – Henceforth, the District Appellate Authorities ought not to have adjudicated the matter or directly appointed the petitioners solely on the basis of a appeal filed before then – The said authority was not the appropriate forum vested with the jurisdiction to make appointments to the post in question – Any grievance pertaining to the first phase of the 2006 appointment process was required to be adjudicated first by the Block Development Officer (BDO), followed by the appropriate appellate authority, in accordance with the prescribed legal framework – Consequently, the action of the District Appellate Authority bypassing the due process and usurping the jurisdiction of the competent appointing authority, is ultra vires and legally unsustainable – The impugned action in, therefore bad in law and is liable to declared void ab initio. (Page 16, 20 & 24)

Service Law – Appointment of Panchayat Teachers – Appellate – Limitation – The petitioners approaching the District Appellate Authority after more than six to eight years and as such the appeal is barred by limitation and no cogent justification or plausible explanation for the inordinate delay has been provided and in absence of any satisfactory reasoning for such a prolonged lapse, the appeal is unsustainable in law – However, regarding delay in filing appeals by the State before the State Appellate Authority, while such appeals may be dismissed on grounds of delay attributable to the default of an officer or employee, the ultimate casualty in such instances is public interest – Public interest, being a paramount consideration in the exercise of judicial discretion, some reasonable latitude is be extended to the State in matters, where delay is neither mala fide or indicative of gross negligence – State Appellate Authority rightly exercised to discretion in condoning the delay. (Paras 33 & 34)

Service Law – Appointment of Panchayat Teacher – New recruitment rules coming into force after 2012, any vacancy arising in the year 2015 due to voluntary resignation of an individual who had secured appointment through legal means, would be deemed to have fallen vacant at that point of time – Consequently, such vacancies must be filled strictly in accordance with 2012 recruitment rules or any other rules prevailing at the time the vacancies arises – As a result, the claim of the individuals applying during the initial appointment process would not subsist, as the selection process must conform to the legal framework in force at the time of the vacancy rather than the rules that existed at the time of the initial appointment – State Appellate Authority rightly allowed the appeals of the respondents – Writ petitions dismissed. (Paras 38 & 39)

State of Orissa Vs. Rajkishore Nanda, (2010) 6 SCC 777; State of Punjab Vs. Raghbir Chand Sharma, (2002) 1 SCC 113; Collector (Land Acquisition) Vs. Katiji, (1987) 2 SCC 107 at page 108; State of Haryana Vs. Chandra Mani, (1996) 3 SCC 132 at page 138; Civil Appeal No. 2474 of 2012 – Relied.

M/s Abhinav Srivastava, Sr. Adv. (in 4554); Arun Kumar(in 18315); Bhuneshwar Pandey (in 10844, 11137, 11891); Bipin Bihari Singh (in 10955, 17728, 908, 1124, 10139, 10732, 16458, 17645, 17679, 18362, 1280, 3178, 9044, 10001, 12528, 12608, 12965); Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary (in 11461, 16170); Kameshwar Kumar, GP-17 (in 1116); Karandeep Kumar (in 16673); Krishna Kant Singh (in 9061, 9062); Mukesh Kumar (in 8092); Nawnit Kumar Tiwary (in 17762); Pankaj Kumar Sinha (in 9405); Pratap Sharma (in 3883); Rakesh Ranjan (in 335); Satyam Shivam Sundaram (in 7455, 7956, 12923, 15093, 15450, 15766, 18081, 1037, 1116, 1120, 3103, 4140, 4160, 11855, 12183, 12726); Shambhu Sharan Kumar (in 13526); Udai Shankar Singh (in 11380); Umesh Kumar Mishra (in 7405, 18173, 18409, 436, 1001, 4178, 4496, 5932, 8696).

M/s Additional Advocate General (12) (in 12965, 1280, 10844, 18362); Advocate General (in 11137, 12183, 8696, 9062); Binita Singh, SC-28 (in 7956, 8092); Dhurjati Kr. Prasad, GP-14 (in 18315); Goverment Advocate 2 (in 12528, 11461, 4140, 4160, 10001); Government Pleader (10) (in 436, 4496, 11891, 4178, 9044, 12726, 1001, 3883, 3103); Jitendra Kr. Roy-1, SC-13 (in 11380, 15450, 7405, 1120, 13526); Kameshwar Kumar, GP-17 (in 4554, 16458, 16673, 18081, 908); Madan Jeet Kumar, GP-20 (in 15766, 7455, 9405, 1037, 10732, 17728); Madhaw Pd. Yadaw, GP-23 (in 15093, 16170, 10955); Pankaj Kumar, SC-12 (in 17679); Prabhakar Jha, GP-27 (in 12923); Sarvesh Kumar, GP-24 (in 17762); Shilpa Singh, GA-12 (in 335); Standing Counsel (20) (in 12608, 5932, 11855, 9061, 3178, 18409, 18173); Subhash Chandra Mishra, SC-16 (in 10139, 1124); Vikash Kumar, SC-11 (in 17645).