SARITA KUMARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in the present application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of an order dated 05.09.2012 passed by the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Lakhisarai (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) whereby, the petitioner's appointment as Panchayat Teacher has been ordered to be terminated and the Appointment Unit of Gram Panchayat Saidpura in the district of Lakhisarai has been directed to appoint respondent No. 11 as Panchayat Teacher whose case, according to the Tribunal's order, was not considered by the selection committee.

(2.) IT is the petitioner's case that the second phase of appointment of Panchayat Teachers in the State of Bihar started in the year 2008. This is not in dispute that in terms of Rule 9(iii) of Bihar Panchayat Teachers Appointment Rules, 2006 the Panchayat Secretary of the concerned Gram Panchayat is the competent person to receive applications from the aspirants. It is the case of the petitioner, as stated in the writ application, that the Panchayat Selection Committee in its meeting held on 27.10.2008 had decided that the application forms shall be collected by one Pankaj Kumar, a teacher of Primary School, Saidpura since Raju Mahto, the Panchayat Secretary, had absented himself from work. It is the petitioner's case that application forms for the purpose of appointment as Panchayat Teacher in the concerned Gram Panchayat were collected at two places one at the Panchayat level and other at Prakhand level. At the Panchayat level, the said Pankaj Kumar, a teacher of Primary School, had collected the forms and total 293 applications were received, which were taken into consideration by the Selection Committee. Upon culmination of the process of selection, on the basis of merit, the petitioner was selected as Panchayat Teacher against unreserved female category post. The appointment letter was, accordingly, issued to her on 14.08.2009.

(3.) IN the meanwhile, respondent No.11 had filed an appeal before the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Lakhisarai vide appeal No. 75/08 -09 with the claim that she had submitted an application to the Panchayat Secretary, Raju Mahto, but her name was not considered by the concerned Mukhiya. By an order dated 09.07.2009 the Appellate Authority considered the appeal of respondent No. 11 and cancelled the merit list for appointment to the post of Panchayat Teachers for the concerned Gram Panchayat. It is the petitioner's case that the order was passed by the Tribunal without hearing the concerned Gram Panchayat. Thereafter, the Panchayat approached the Tribunal and produced before it the list of applications received at the Panchayat level and block level. Accordingly, by an order dated 12.08.2009, the Appellate Authority withdrew its earlier order dated 09.07.2009 and directed the Panchayat Secretary and Mukhiya of the concerned Gram Panchayat to ensure appointment on the basis of merit list prepared by the Selection Committee. In the order dated 12.08.2009 the Tribunal observed that respondent No. 11, Laxmi Kumari, might have submitted her application form to Panchayat Secretary, Raju Mahto. In the said order dated 12.08.2009, the Tribunal also observed that respondent No. 11 might have submitted her application to said Raju Mahto, the Panchayat Secretary but since he had absented himself from 29.10.2008, he was restrained from receiving applications.