UPENDRA PODDAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order, dated 08/04/2013, passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 2540 of 2010, whereby an order of the Member, District Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal, Khagaria (hereinafter referred to as the "Appellate Tribunal"), in Appeal Case No. 134 of 2009, has been set aside, is under challenge in the present intra Court Appeal under Clause - 10 of Letters Patent of this Court.

(2.) By the order, dated 20/05/2009, the Appellate Tribunal had allowed the Appeal preferred by the present appellant on the ground that he had a rightful claim to be appointed against unreserved Roster Point No. 423, for the post of Panchayat Teacher in Sahsi Gram Panchayat Raj of Khagaria district, and held that the appointment of respondent No. 8 against the said post was illegal. The Appellate Tribunal, accordingly, set-aside the appointment of respondent No. 8 and directed the Panchayat Secretary, Sahsi Gram Panchyat Rajya, to appoint the appellant against the said Roster Point No. 423.

(3.) There are certain facts, which are not at all in dispute. The appellant had applied for the post of general teacher in Sahsi Gram Panchayat Rajya, Allauli. There were altogether 16 posts; out of which, 11 posts were for general teachers and 5 for Urdu teachers. This is not in dispute that respondent No. 8 herein had applied for the post of Urdu teacher, whereas, the appellant had applied against 11 posts meant for general teachers. This is also not in dispute that the posts were to be filled up on the basis of reservation policy applicable for appointment to those posts for which, register points were fixed. The respondent No. 8 was appointed as Urdu teacher against the unreserved Roster Point No. 423. It is the case of the appellant that the said Roster Point No. 423 was fixed for unreserved candidates against which, he ought to have been appointed and respondent No. 8 was wrongly appointed as Urdu teacher, whose name had earlier figured against unreserved Roster Point No. 431 of the wait list. The appellant, with this grievance, had approached the Appellate Authority challenging the appointment of respondent No. 8 by filing an appeal giving rise to Appeal Case No. 134 of 2009.