NASEEM AHMAD KHAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the private respondent as well as the State. Petitioner has assailed Annexure-9, dated 8.2.2010, which is the order passed by the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Sitamarhi in Case No. 104 of 2009. The dispute relates to the appointment on the post of a Panchayat Teacher carried out in the year 2006, for which private respondent No. 9 filed a case before the Tribunal in the year 2009 alleging that even though he had higher marks, his appointment has not been made. The Tribunal accepting his assertion as gospel truth, set aside the appointment of the petitioner and directed appointment of the private respondent to be made.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits many a things which are not required to be noticed except the fact that the private respondent moved the Tribunal only in the year 2009 seeking a direction for his appointment on the sole ground that the petitioner had lesser percentage of marks, which is 69.58% whereas the private respondent has 70.30% marks.

(3.) Counsel representing the private respondent submits that in the counter affidavit he has brought evidence to show that he had made complaints before the DSE, Sitamarhi and the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi in the year 2007 itself but since those authorities slept over the matter, private respondent ultimately having been left with no option, decided to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. It is also the private respondent's stand that he has obtained information under the Right to Information Act and only when he got adequate evidence, he decided to move the Tribunal.