JAI PRAKASH DAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the present writ application the petitioners have prayed for a direction to issue orders of appointments of the petitioners as Assistant Teachers in the reserve category of the Scheduled Caste on the basis of the panel which was prepared for appointments under the Harijan Category candidates.

(2.) THE case of the petitioners is that pursuant to the advertisement issued by the respondents for filling up the post of Assistant Teacher in the Primary schools, a districtwise panel was prepared. The petitioners also applied for the said post pursuant to the said advertisement and were empanelled under the Harijan category candidates. A list of such Harijan category candidates has been annexed as Annexure -1 to the writ application, which according to the petitioners, is a panel of untrained Harijan Category candidates mentioning altogether 34 names. The petitioners have figured in the said list at serial Nos. 25 to 33. However, from Annexure -1 it does not appear that when and under whose order, same was issued. Nothing has been stated in the writ application also as to when this panel was prepared. The further case of the petitioners in the writ application is that from the said list as contained in Annexure -1 it appears that though the candidates mentioned from.serial Nos. 1 to 24 have already been appointed as Assistant Teachers but the petitioners, who figured from serial Nos.25 to 33 in the said list, were not appointed. The further case of the petitioners is that though the vacancies is still exists but they have not been given appointments.

(3.) IT is relevant to note that pursuant to the order of the Government of Bihar a districtwise panel was prepared for appointments of the Assistant Teachers in the entire State of Bihar. However, preparation of the districtwise panel was challenged before the Patna High Court and the Division Bench of the Patna High Court in the case of Anil Kumar V/s. State of Bihar, 1987 0 PLJR 846, quashed the panel prepared districtwise holding to be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. However, it was held in the said decision that any person who had already appointed pursuant to the panel soprepared districtwise shall not be effected as they were not parties before the High Court in the said case.