Advocates:
['Harsh Anuj', '', 'Prashant Kumar', 'DINBANDHU SINGH', '', 'Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5064 of 2014

======================================================

1. Subhash Pandey S/O Late Kanhaiya Pandey, Resident of Village

Jogeyan, P.O- Kajhayne, P.S- Bikramganj, District- Rohtas.

2. Kamlesh Pandey S/O Sri Keshav Pandey, Resident of Village- Jogeyan,

P.O- Kajhayne, P.S- Bikramganj, District- Rohtas.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development,

Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Joint Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development,

Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Education Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram.

5. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Rohtas at Sasaram.

6. The Chairman, District Board cum Chairman of Secondary School

Teachers Selection Committee, Rohtas at Sasaram.

7. The Deputy Development Commissioner cum Chief Executive Officer,

District Board, Sasaram, (Rohtas)

8. The Member, District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority,

Rohtas, Sasaram.

.... .... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Harsh Anuj

For the Respondent State: Mr. Dinbandhu Singh, GP 9

Mr. Rana Bhupendra Nr. Singh, AC to GP 9

For Respondent No. 7 : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI

ORAL ORDER

2

27-11-2014

The two petitioners before this High Court want a

mandamus on the respondent authorities to implement the order of

the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority dated

21.11.2013 passed in Appeal No.16/2013 with 17/2013. In other

words, petitioners want this Court to become an execution court of

the order of the tribunal.

2. The contention of the counsel representing the petitioners

Patna High Court CWJC No.5064 of 2014 (2) dt.27-11-2014

2 / 4

2

is that after due consideration with regard to their legitimate claim

for appointment as Librarian under Respondent Nos. 6 and 7, an

order has been passed in their favour that their claim for

appointment as Librarian ought to be considered in light of the

Government Circular dated 16^th December, 2011, contained in

Annexure-2.

3. Annexure-2 has been issued under the signature of Joint

Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar,

indicating therein that there has been long delay in making

appointment on the post of Librarian despite the 2006 Rule

coming into place and requisite amendment brought about in

2008. Since the process of such appointment was delayed, many a

candidates, who were applicants, became over-age. To give

benefit of consideration to such applicants, this circular has been

issued, condoning over-age of such candidates.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners very fairly accepts the

position that since petitioners were over-age initially at the time of

advertisement in the year 2008, they did not apply but later on,

they applied to take advantage of circular, contained in Annexure-

2. Their claim was not acted upon, which compelled them to

approach the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority.

The order in their favour is not being implemented.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5064 of 2014 (2) dt.27-11-2014

3 / 4

3

5. The question for consideration is whether an erroneous

interpretation given by the District Teachers Employment

Appellate Authority is capable of enforcement or a mandamus can

be issued for implementation of the wrong order passed on wrong

understanding by the tribunal.

6. The Court has very carefully gone through Annexure-2.

The relevant portion of the said circular is reproduced herein

below for reference:

“PARANTU

YAH

NIRNAY

VISHESH

PARISTHITI ME KHASKAR ES WAT KO

DHYAN ME RAKHKAR LIYA JA RAHA HAI KI

LAMBE KAL-KHAND ME