IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2586 of 2012

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

1. Bodh Narayan Pd. Singh S/O Sri Agrahan Pd. Singh R/O Village-

Sultanpur, Police Station- Shahkund, District- Bhagalpur

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The Director Department Of Human Resources Development, Govt. Of

Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur

4. The District Superintendent Of Education, Bhagalpur

5. The Member, District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal,

Bhagalpur

6. The Block Development Officer, Shahkund Block Police Station-

Shahkund, District- Bhagalpur

7. The Block Education Extension Officer Shahkund Block, Police Station-

Shahkund, District- Bhagalpur

8. The Panchayat Sachiv, Jagaria Gram Panchayat Shahkund Block, Police

Station- Shahkund, District- Bhagalpur

9. The Mukhiya, Jagaria Gram Panchayat Shahkund Block, District-

Bhagalpur

10. Manjit Kumar S/O Late Kabir Das R/O Village- Pansalla (Kusmaha),

Police Station- Amarpur, Ditrict- Banka

11. Usha Devi W/O Rakesh Kumar Singh R/O Village- Mothabari, Police

Station- Sultanganj, District- Bhagalpur

.... .... Respondent/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Najmul Hodda

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prahlad Kr. Bhagat Gp13

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA

ORAL ORDER

3

18-12-2012

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State

and for respondent Nos.10 and 11.

The

petitioner

is

aggrieved

by

order

dated

15.12.2011 passed by the District Teachers’ Appointment

Appellate Tribunal, Bhagalpur in Appeal Case No.10/11.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his

appointment has been set aside without notice to show cause

Patna High Court CWJC No.2586 of 2012 (3) dt.18-12-2012

2

and opportunity of defence. The order is therefore void ab

initio.

Learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 10 and 11

submit that the appeal was filed by them. The opening lines

of the order of the Tribunal state that all selected Panchayat

Teachers had appeared and placed their case. It is wrong for

the petitioner to state that he was not noticed or heard. The

order is reasoned and the Court may not interfere with it.

The orders of the Tribunal are final and there is no

forum for appeal. The principles of natural justice apply not

only to administrative authorities but equally to proceedings

before a Court or a Tribunal. No person can be condemned

unheard.

The

appeal

originated

on

a

representation

submitted by respondent Nos. 10 and 11 to the Chief

Minister in his Janta Darbar. It may have contained

allegations against the petitioner. That shall not suffice. If the

complaint was then forwarded to the Tribunal, the Tribunal

was required to notice the persons against whom allegations

had been made, implead them as party respondents, and

issue notice to them. This was an inherent duty of the

Tribunal even if the respondent nos.10 and 11 did not file

any formal application for impleading the petitioner.

The petitioner states in paragraph-12 that the

Tribunal did not issue any show cause notice to him or grant

hearing. The counter affidavit of respondent No.10 at

Patna High Court CWJC No.2586 of 2012 (3) dt.18-12-2012

3

paragraph-11 does not deny the same. The order of the

Tribunal undoubtedly states that the appointed teachers had

appeared and placed their case. There is no discussion when

they were impleaded as party respondents and notices were

issued to them. It does not disclose which of the appointed

teachers appeared. Even if the Court were to read that the

petitioner had appeared, there had to be either a finding that

no submissions were made on his behalf before coming to the

conclusion for terminating his appointment or alternately