Patna High Court - Orders
Basant Kumar Singh & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 19 September, 2014
Author: Jayanandan Singh
Bench: Jayanandan Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12679 of 2003
======================================================
Ram Shankar Roy, son of Shree Bino Roy, resident of village and Gram
Panchayat Akawarpur, Block & P.S. Matihani, District Begusarai
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Rural Development
Panchayati Raj, Govt. of Bihar, Biseshweriya Bhawan, Patna.
3. The Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Begusarai-cum-Chairman, District Panchayat
Sewak Selection Committee, Begusarai
5. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Begusarai - cum - Vice
Chairman, the District Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee, Begusarai
6. The District Panchayat Officer, Begusarai- cum- Member Secretary, the
District Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee, Begusarai
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12797 of 2003
======================================================
Nathuni Prasad Yadav son of Sri Sukhraj Yadav, resident of village + Post
+ Gram Panchayat Barka Rajpur, Police Station & Block Simri, District
Buxar.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Director of Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Buxar-cum-Chairman, District Panchayat Sewak
Selection Committee, Buxar.
5. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Buxar - cum - Vice
Chairman, the District Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee, Buxar
6. The District Panchayat Officer, Buxar- cum - Member Secretary, District
Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee, Buxar
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12258 of 2000
======================================================
Ram Subhag Bhokta, son of Sri Shiv Mangal Bhokta, resident of Village
Rampur Kala, Post Office Radhaganj, Bazar, Under Gram Panchayat
Majirwan Kala, Police Station Mirganj, Block Phulwaria, District
Gopalganj.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Director, Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj
4. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Gopalganj
.... .... Respondents
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
2/54
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18263 of 2008
======================================================
1. Manoj Kumar Singh, son of Chatur Singh, resident of Village - Post
Office and Gram Panchayat Maheshari, Police Station and Block Sonu
2. Anant Kumar Yadav son of Chetan Yadav, resident of Village, Post
Office and Gram Panchayat Sahiya, Police station and Block Jhajha.
3. Naresh Kumar Yadav, son of Sri Ram Lakhan Yadav, resident of
Village, Post Office and Gram Panchayat- Panro, Police Station and Block
Barhat.
4. Rajju Mandal son of Ayodhya Mandal, resident of village Hardi Moh,
Post Office Pradhan Chak, Gram Panchayat Jhingoi, (Old Nijwara) Police
Station and Block Khaira.
All the petitioners belong to the district of Jamui
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Jamui
5. The Deputy development Commissioner, Jamui
4. The District Panchayat Officer, Jamui
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17716 of 2008
======================================================
1. Basant Kumar Singh, son of Ramchandra Singh, resident of Village and
Post Office Asni, Police Station Udwant Nagar.
2. Sant kuamr Dubey son of Ram Sampurn Dubey, resident of Village
Bankat, Post Office Sikariyan, Police station Sahpur.
3. Sidheswar Singh son of Late Mitthu Singh resident of Village and Post
Office Balbandh, Police Station Charpokhri.
4. Sri Ram Singh son of Late Bhola Singh, resident of Village and Post
Office Dawan, Police Station Jagdishpur.
5. Raj Kumar Singh son of Late Bisheshwar Singh resident of Village
Gadaha, Post Office Asni, Police Station Udwant Nagar.
6. Shushil Kumar son of Indamani Singh, resident of Village and Post
Office IPanwari, Police Station Sikrahta.
7. Jai Kumar Singh, son of Late Purndeo Singh, resident of Village
Narayanpur, Police Station Sandesh.
8. Ramayan Singh son of Ram Ayodhaya Singh, resident of Village Ahile
Post Office Poswan, Police Station Agiyaon.
9. Om Prakash Singh, son of late Desiee Singh resident of Village
Narayanpur, Post Office Bhaniyaon, Police Station Jagdishpur.
10. Paras Singh, son of Late Pulwant Singh, resident of Village and Post
Office Moapkala, Police Station Imadpur Bishpura.
11. Lalbabu Singh son of Sabhapati Singh, resident of Village Kamariyan
Post Office Chilhar Police Station Ajimabad.
12. Shiv Jee Rai son of Ramchandra Rai, resident of Village and Post
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
3/54
Office Dullamchak, Police Station Chaunri.
13. Ramesh Mishra son of Sri Niwas Mishra resident of Village Injruiee,
Post Office Ramasarh, Police Station Sandesh.
14. Chandeshwar Prasad Singh son of Late Shukhal Singh resident of
Village Bhimpura, Post Office Baga, Police Station Ajimabad.
15. Ramesh Lal son of Lae Jugeshwar Lal resident of Village, Post Office
and Police Station Sandesh.
16. Shiv Kumar Singh son of Late Bhuneshwar Singh, resident of Village
Nargada, Post Office Balua, Police Station Barhara.
17. Anand Kumar Mishra son of Shiv Parsan Mishra, resident of Village
and Post Office Sonbarsa Police Station Sahpur.
18. Rajendra Pandey son of Late Guljar Pandey, resident of Village and
Post Office Ekauna, Police Station Barhara.
19. Lalan Tiwari son of late Dharichchan Tiwari, resident of Village, Post
Office Bhadchhera, Police Station Tarari.
20. Arun Kumar Singh son of Vishwanath Singh, resident of Village
Basudhar, Post Office Bahuara, Police Station Jagdishpur.
21. Rajendra Singh, son of Mundrika Singh, resident of Village and Post
Office Kosiar, Police Station Chauriee.
22. Amirchand Singh son of Late Janardan Singh, resident of Village
Chiraili, Post Office Berath, Police Station Chauri.
23. Jitendra Kumar Singh son of Sri Babu Ram Singh, resident of Village
Udra Nagar, Post Office Gaudarh, Police Station Sahpur.
24. Ram Nath Pandey, son of Late Mahendra Pandey, resident of Village,
Post Office and Police Station Udwant Nagar.
25. Kamal Nain Tiwary son of Sri Krishna Bihari Tiwari, resident of
Village Barki Sanadia, Post Office Ratanpur, Police Station Ara Muffasil.
26. Kasi Nath Singh, son of Raghubir Singh, resident of Village Ekauna,
Post Office and Police Station Agiyaon.
27. Juber Khan, son of Late Abdul Haffiz Khan resident of Village and
Post Office Bagahi, Police Station Bihiyan.
28. Ajab Narayan Singh, son of Mahanand Singh, resident of Village and
Post Office Mahakampur Police Station Koilwar.
29. Ramesh Pandey, son of Jai Ram Pandey, resident of Village and Post
Office Sikaraul, Police Station Tarari.
30. Din Dayal Ojha son of Shiv Jee Ojha, resident of Village Kawalpatti,
Post Office Chandaul, Police Station Bihiyan.
31. Chandra Shekhar Singh son of Sri Ram Beyas Singh, resident of
Village Dhel Dumra Post Office Bara Dumra, Police Station Arrah
Muffasil.
32. Anil Kumar Singh son of Late Kamta Singh, resident of Village
Kaniee Post Office Dhurub Diha, Police Station Charpokhri.
All petitioners belong to the District of Bhojpur at Arrah.
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Arrah
5. The District Panchayat Officer, Bhojpur at Arrah.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
4/54
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17387 of 2008
======================================================
1. Rajeev Kumar son of Kameshwar Prasad Singh, resident of Gram
Panchayat Kunauli, Police Station and Block Nirmali
2. Bhuneshwar Yadav son of Kari Yadav, resident of Gram Panchayat,
Police Station and Block Raghopur,
3. Bhagwat Yadav son of Ramadheen Yadav, resident of Gram Panchayat
Pariponch Police Station and Block Marauna,
4. Gaya Nand Thakur son of Jiwachh Thakur, resident of Gram Panchayat
Marauna-I, Police Station and Block Marauna.
5. Bijendra Kumar Bimal son of Late Ram Prasad Yadav, resident of Gram
Panchayat Haddi East Police Station and Block Marauna.
6. Ram Das Rai son of Chakradhar Rai, resident of Gram Panchayat Balua
Bazar, Police Station and Block Chhatapur.
7. Sambhu Nath Mishra son of Late Ganesh Prasad Mehta, resident of
Gram Panchayat Ratanpur, Police Station and Block Basantpur.
8. Nathuni Prasad Yadav son of Sri Shree Prasad Yadav, resident of Gram
Panchayat Naua Bakhar, Police Station and Block Kishanpur
9. Jai Krishan Sharma son of Rashik Lal Sharma, resident of Gram
Panchayat Baishee, Police Station and Block Raghopur.
All petitioners belong to the District of Supaul
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative
Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
5. The District Magistrate, Supaul-cum-Chairman, District Panchayat
Sewak Selection Committee, Supaul.
6. The District Panchayat Officer, Supaul- cum - Member Secretary,
District Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee, Supaul.
7. The Block Development Officer Triwaniganj, District Supaul.
8. The Block Development Officer Chhatapur, District Supaul.
9. The Block Development Officer Raghopur District Supaul.
10. The Block Development Officer Nirmali, District Supaul.
11. The Block Development Officer Marauna, District Supaul.
12. The Block Development Officer Supaul, District Supaul.
13. The Block Development Officer Pipra, District Supaul.
14. The Block Development Officer Kishanpur, District Supaul.
15. The Block Development Officer Saraigah Bhapatiyahi,
District Supaul....................................Respondents 1st Set.
16. Sri Shishir Kumar Jha, son of not known to the petitioners.
17. Laxmi Narayan Raut, son of not known to the petitioners.
18. Hari Mohan Mishra son of not known to the petitioners,
19. Binay Kumar Jha son of not known to the petitioners,
20. Rajendra Prasad son of not known to the petitioners,
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
5/54
At present Respondent Nos. 16 to 20 provisionally absorbed on the post of
Panchayat Sewak and posted at Triwaniganj Block, District Supaul.
21. Sushil Chandra Kumar son of not known to the petitioners,
22, Vijay Kumar Mallik son of not known to the petitioners,
At present Respondent Nos. 21 and 22 provisionally absorbed on the post of
Panchayat Sewak and posed at Chhatapur Block, District Supaul.
23. Vidya Charan Jha son of not known to the petitioners,
24. Chandra Mohan Jha son of not known to the petitioners,
At present Respondent nos. 23 and 24 provisionally absorbed on the post of
Panchayat Sewak and posted at Raghopur Block, District Supaul.
25. Bharat Chaubey son of not known to the petitioners,
26. Deo Nath Singh son of not known to the petitioners,
At present Respondent Nos. 25 and 26 provisonally absorbed on the post of
Panchayat Sewak and posted at Nirmalli Block, District Supaul.
27. Shaket Bihari Singh son of not known to the petitioners,
28. Gangadhar Mishra son of not known to the petitioners,
29. Yagya Nand Prasad son of not known to the petitioners,
All present Respondent Nos. 27 to 29 provisionally absorbed on the post of
Panchayat Sewak and posted at Marauna Block, District Supaul.
30. Nand Kumar Singh son of not known to the petitioners,
31. Madan Kishore Mishra son of not known to the petitioners,
All present Respondent Nos.30 and 31 provisionally absorbed on the post of
Panchayat Sewak and posted at Supaul Block, District Supaul.
32. Gopal Chaudhary son of not known to the petitioners, at present
provisionally on the post of Panchayat Sewak and posted at Pipra Block,
District Supaul.
33. Nagendra Jha, son of not known to the petitioners, at present
provisionally on the post of Panchayat Sewak and posted at Kishanpur
Block, District Supaul.
34. Devendra Kumar, son of not known to the petitioners, at present
provisionally on the post of Panchayat Sewak and posted at Saraigarh
Bhapatiyahi Block, District Supaul.
.... .... Respondents 2nd Set.
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17089 of 2008
======================================================
1. Kedar Nath Singh son of Late Baij Nath Singh, resident of village and
Post Office Dhandihan, Police Station and Block Koilwar.
2. Om Prakash Singh son of Late Ram Shakal Singh, resident of village
Majhiyaon Post Office Hasan Bazaar, Police Station and Block Piro
3. Lal Bahadur Singh son of Mahendra Singh resident of village and Post
Office Sara, Police Station and Block Tarari.
4. Vijay Kumar Singh son of Shiv Prasad Singh, resident of village and
Post Office Semrawan Police Station and Block Charpokhri.
5. Wakil Singh son of Late Sumiran Singh, resident of village Sangam
Tola, Post Office Tendulin, Police Station and Block Jagdishpur
6. Kamendra Sah son of Late Ram Dayal Sah, resident of village and Post
Office Jamurhi Police Station and Block Piro.
7. Chandra Bhushan Rai, son of Raghupat Rai, resident of village
Mehandaura Post Office Kirkiri, Police Station Azimabad Block Agiyaon.
8. Vijay Bahadur Singh son of Late Rajdeo Singh resident of village and
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
6/54
Post Office Chanda Kawatian, Police Station Bihiyan Block Sahpur.
9. Chandra Shekhar Singh son of Late Hariwans Singh, resident of village
and Post Office Lahkhan, Police Station Agiyaon Bazar Block Piro.
10. Dasarath Singh son of Jibodhan Singh, resident of village Itapur Post
Office Bimwan Police Station and Block Jagdishpur.
11. Dineshwar Yadav, son of Late Sudheshwar Yadav, resident of village
and Post Office Vanoaku, Police Station and Block Udwant Nagar.
12. Jagdish Rai son of Ramjeewan Rai resident of village Bhakura Post
Office Lohar Pharna, Police Station and Block Ara Muffasil,
All the petitioners belong to the District of Bhojpur at Arrah
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Arrah.
5. The District Panchayat Officer, Bhojpur at Arrah
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15760 of 2008
======================================================
1. Bimal Kumar Mandal son of Late Thakur Prasad Mandal, resident of
Village Masaru, Post Office Mamalkhan, Police Station and Block Sabaur.
2. Rajendra Prasad mandal son of Prasadee Mandal resident of Gram
Panchayat Nadiyana, Police Station and Block Goradih.
3. Md. Emraj son of Shekh Jakurddin, resident of Gram Panchayat
Lokmanypur, Police Station and Block Kharkha.
4. Bidya Nn Singh son of Kuldeep Singh, resident of Gram Panchayat
Jaipur Chuhar East, Police Station and Block Narainpur.
5. Md. Jameel son of Md. Mabul, resident of Gram Panchayat Police Station
and Block Pirpainti.
6. Srikant Yadav son of Saligram Prasad Yadav, resident of Gram
Panchayat Badinamki, Police Station and Block Sanhaula.
7. Parmanand Yadav son of Bhena Lal Yadav, resident of Gram Panchayat,
Police Station and Block Gopalpur.
8. Binay Kumar Yaaav son of Shyamdeo Yadav, resident of Gram
Panchayat, Police Station and Block Sanhaula.
9. Dinesh Kumar Singh son of Kamleshwari Prasad Singh, resident of
Gram Panchayat Punama Pratapnagar, Police Station and Block
Naugachhiya,
10. Ajay Kumar son of Chhatradhari Singh, resident of Gram Panchayat
Khankitta, Police Station and Block Sabour.
11. Jandardan Prasad Sah son of Ambika Prasad Sah, resident of Gram
Panchayat Mohanpur Gurhatta Police Station and Block Kahalgaon,
12. Gopal Prasad Sah son of Shokhi Sah, resident of Gram Panchayat
Koriyap, Police Station and Kahalgaon,
13. Madan Kumar Madan son of Khusru Prasad Singh, resident of Gram
Panchayat Fazilpur Sakrama, Police Station and Block Sanhaula.
14. Pramod Kumar Yadav son of Jagdish Yadav, resident of Gram
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
7/54
Panchayat Janidih Police Station and Block Kahalgaon,
All belongs to the District of Bhagalpur
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative
Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
5. The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur-cum-Chairman, District Panchayat
Sewak Selection Committee, Bhagalpur
6. The District Panchayat Officer, Bhagalpur- cum - Member Secretary,
District Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee, Bhagalpur.
7. The Secretary, Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Post Veterinary
College, Patna ................................Respondents 1st Set.
8. Harendra Singh, son of not known to the petitioners
9. Bidyanand Dubey, son of not known to the petitioners,
10. Ajit Kumar Singh, son of not known to the petitioners,
11. Anil Kumar Verma, son of not known to the petitioners,
12. Ramashray Prasad, son of not known to the petitioners,
13. Jai Narayan Das, son of not known to the petitioners,
14. Satya Ranjan Das, son of not known to the petitioners,
15. Sri Ramchandra Prasad Singh-II, son of not known to the petitioners,
16. Sri Ram Sagar Singh, son of not known to the petitioners,
17. Raghunath Prasad Sinha, son of not known to the petitioners,
18. Aas Narayan Singh, son of not known to the petitioners,
19. Sri Rajeshwar Prasad, son of not known to the petitioners,
20. Sri Ravindra Kumar, son of not known to the petitioners,
21. Sri Krishna Paswan, son of not known to the petitioners,
22. Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh-III, son of not known to the petitioners,
23. Chandeshwar Kapri, son of not known to the petitioners,
24. Vijay Kumar Sinha-II, son of not known to the petitioners,
25. Vijay Kumar Singh, son of not known to the petitioners,
26. Sanjeev Kumar, son of not known to the petitioners,
27. Arun Kumar Srivastva, son of not known to the petitioners,
28. Birendra Kumar Singh, son of not known to the petitioners,
29. Prakash Upadhaya, son of not known to the petitioners,
30. Govind Saran Sinha, son of not known to the petitioners
31. Radha Moha Pathak, son of not known to the petitioners,
32. Sanjeev Kumar II, son of not known to the petitioners,
33. Sri Janardan Singh, son of not known to the petitioners,
34. Sri Krishn Kanhiya Rana, son of not known to the petitioners,
35. Sri Jamuna Singh, son of not known to the petitioners,
36. Guput Singh, son of not known to the petitioners,
37. Rewti Raman Prasad, son of not known to the petitioners,
All Respondent nos. 8 to 37 are in the office of District Magistrate,
Bhagalpur waiting for their absorption and posting on the post of Panchayat
Sewak.
.... .... Respondents
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
8/54
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.656 of 2011
======================================================
1. Mithlesh Kumar son of Late Shyam Sundar Prasad, resident of village-
and Gram Panchayat - Nathanpur, P.O and P.S-Birpur, Block-Brahia,
District-Lakhisarai.
2. Anuj Kumar son of Late Mohar Singh resident of village-and Post
Office-Mahsaurha, Gram Panchayat, Mahsaurha, P.S.-Lakhisarai, Muffasil,
Block-Ramgarh Chowk, District-Lakhisarai.
3. Dilip Kumar son of Rambalak Singh, resident of Village-Chetantola
Khotan , P.O. Dih Khathan, Gram Panchayat Chetantola Khothan, P. S. and
Block-Barhaia, District-Lakhisarai.
4. Sofinder Matho son of Late Yamuna Matho resident of village-and P. O.-
and Gram Panchayat-Mohadinagar, P.S. and Block-Halsi, District-
Lakhisarai.
... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of
Bihar,Patna.
4. The Director/Joint Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government
of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Commissioner Munger Division Munger.
6. The District Magistrate Lakhisarai-Cum-Chairman, District-Panchayat
Sewak Selection Committee Lakhisarai.
7. The Depty Development Commissioner -Cum-Vice Chairman, District-
Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee Lakhisarai.
8. The Panchayati Officer Lakhisarai-Cum-Member Secretary, District-
Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee Lakhisarai.
9. The Chairman Bihar Staff Selection Commission, P.O. Veterinary
College, Patna.
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12882 of 2003
======================================================
Anil Kumar Choubey son of Sri Niwas Choubey, resident of village &
Panchayat Ganuli, Post Dumra Police Station and Block Louriya, District
West Champaran at Bettiah
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Secretary Rural Development Department
(Panchayati Raj), Govt. of Bihar, Bisweseria Bhawan, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director/Incharge Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate West Champaran-Cum-Chairman, District-
Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee West Champaran
5. The Deputy Development Commissioner , West Champran at Bettiah-
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
9/54
cum-Vice Chairman, District Panchayat Sevak Selection Committee, West
Champaran at Bettiah.
6. The District Panchayat Officer-cum-Member Secretary, District-
Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee West Champaran at Bettiah.
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15066 of 2005
======================================================
1. Sarajul Haque son of Late Abdus Slam, resident of Village Bakhari
Khajuri, P.O. Barharwa Fate Mohammad, Under Gram Panchayat
Karmawan (Now Bhagwanpur) P.S. and Block Dhaka, District East
Champaran at Motihari.
2. Lakhendra Singh son of Late Chhathu Singh, resident of Village
Kundwa Cahinpur, Under Gram Panchayat Asthan Cainpur (Now Kharua
Chainpur) P.S. Kundwa chainpur, Block Dhaka, District East Champaran at
Motihari
... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Secretary, Department of Rural Development (Panchayati Raj),
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Directorate of Panchayati Ran Government of Bihar,
Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari.
5. The District Panchayat Officer, East Champaran at Motihari
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2429 of 2006
======================================================
Khelawan Roy son of Late Jhabhu Roy, resident of Village Sarhad Gati,
Under Gram Panchayat Puraini, Post Office Puraini, Police Station and
Block Kumar Khand, District Madhepura
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The District Magistrate, Madhepura.
3. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Madhepura.
4. The District Panchayat Officer, Madhepura.
5. Bhola Sah, son of Baidnath Sah, resident of Village and Gram Panchayat
Uda Kishunganj, Police Station and Block Udakishunganj at present posted
on the post of Panchayat Sewak
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2481 of 2006
======================================================
Rajendra Prasad Yadav son of Sri Jagdish Yadav, resident of Village
Nandanpur, P.O. Mirjapur, Under Gram Panchayat Kumrha (New
Nandanpur) Police Station Baunsi Basainthi, Block Raniganj, District
Araria.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
10/54
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Secretary Department of Rural Development (Panchayati Raj),
Bishwraiya Bhawan, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Commissioner Purniya Division Purniya.
5. The District Magistrate Araria-cum-Chairman, District Panchayat Sewak
Selection Committee Araria.
6. The Deputy Development Commissioner Araria -cum-Vice Chairman,
District Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee Araria.
7. The District Panchayat Officer Araria-cum-Member Secretary, District-
Panchayat Sewak Selection Committee Araria
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3649 of 2006
======================================================
Ramji Kazi, son of Sri Chamri Kazi, resident of village Mainha under Gram
Panchayat Jimari Nautanwa, P.O. Kunai Bhelahi, Police Station Semra
(Chiutaha), Block Bagha-II, District West Champaran at Bettiha
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Commissioner Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
4. The District Magistrate West Champaran at Bettiah.
6. The Deputy Development Commissioner West Champaran at Bettiah
7. The District Panchayat Raj Officer West Champaran at Bettiah
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12563 of 2006
======================================================
Amirchand Singh, son of Sri Janardan Singh resident of Village Chiraiyan,
Under Gram Panchayat-Diliyan, P.O. Berat, Police Station Chaurin, Block
Agiyon and Ditrict Bhojpur at Ara
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate Bhojpur at Ara
6. The Deputy Development Commissioner Bhojpur at Ara
7. The District Panchayat Raj Officer Bhojpur at Ara.
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16281 of 2006
======================================================
Braj Bhushan Singh, son of Rajdeo Singh, resident of Village Kumhkol
Bujurg, Under Gram Panchayat Kumhkil Chakbag, Post Rampur, Kumhkol,
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
11/54
Police Station and Block Sahdei Bujurg, District Vaishali at Hajipur
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur
3. The Commissioner Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
4. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Vaishali at Hajipur
7. The District Panchayat Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13582 of 2005
======================================================
Jai Kishor Singh, son of Anandi Prasad Singh, resident of village
Gopalpatti, P.O. + P.S. Falka, District Katihar
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
5. The Director, Panchayati Raj Directorate, Government of Bihar, Patna.
6. The Commissioner, Purnia Division, Purnia.
7. The District Magistrate, Katihar.
8. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Katihar
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CWJC No.12679 of 2003)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy
Ms. Nikki Singh,
Mr. Ram Narayan Mahto, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.12797 of 2003)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kr.Roy
Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.12258 of 2000)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy
Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.18263 of 2008)
For the Petitioners : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.17716 of 2008)
For the Petitioners : Mr. Jitendra Kr.Roy, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Niraj Kumar, AC to GA 13
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
12/54
(In CWJC No.17387 of 2008)
For the Petitioners : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.17089 of 2008)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.15760 of 2008)
For the Petitioners : Mr. Jitendra Kr.Roy, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.656 of 2011)
For the Petitioners : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.12882 of 2003)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kr.Roy
Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.15066 of 2005)
For the Petitioners : Mr. Jitendra Kr.Roy
Mr. Reshikesh Kumar, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar Singh, AC to AAG 10
(In CWJC No.2429 of 2006)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kr.Roy
Mr. Reshikesh Kumar, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.2481 of 2006)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kr.Roy
Mr. Reshikesh Kumar, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.3649 of 2006)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy
Mr. Chandra Shkehar Nr.Sinha, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.12563 of 2006)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, AAG 2
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 2
(In CWJC No.16281 of 2006)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy
Mr. Chandra Shekhar Nr.Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Maruth Nath Roy, AC to SC 25
(In CWJC No.13582 of 2005)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Satyendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar Singh, AC to AAG 10
======================================================
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014
13/54
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH
CAV ORDER
11 19-09-2014Petitioners of all these 17 writ applications claim to be appointed as dalpaties in respective gram-panchayats in terms of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1947. They claim that in view of the policy decision of the Government, they have acquired right to be appointed as panchayat-sevaks in respective gram-
panchayats, now re-designated as panchayat-secretaries. Their grievance is that after the policy decision, while the process of filling up all the posts of panchayat-sevaks from dalpaties was in mid way, respondents abandoned it and changed the mode of appointment on the posts through the Staff Selection Commission. Their claim is that while their cases were pending for final orders by this Court, the State Government took a policy decision to fill up only 531 posts of panchayat-sevaks from dalpaties in whose cases this Court had already passed orders. This decision of the State Government was noticed and endorsed by a Division Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 11.08.2009 passed in LPA No.786 of 2006 (State of Bihar & other Vs. Subhash Chandra Shukla). They claim that, before deciding to fill up only 531 vacancies from dalpaties, the respondents did not take into account that they had taken a policy decision to appoint dalpaties on the posts of panchayat-
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 14/54sevaks on the basis of seniority. Therefore, for filling up these 531 posts from dalpaties, they should have taken into account the respective seniority of the dalpaties, irrespective of the fact that there was an order of this Court in their cases or not and they should have taken into consideration the cases of those dalpaties also whose cases were pending in this Court.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also filed a written note of issues being raised in these cases. But before taking them into account for consideration, this Court has thought it proper to take notice of various Government circulars / letters / resolutions / notifications (excluding personal letters/orders etc.) available on records of these writ applications, in chronological order. They are as follows:-
Serial No. Contents
1) - Letter No. 6537 dated 26.11.1987 of Director,
Panchayati Raj to D.M., East Champaran - An-5 with CWJC No. 12679/03 - On representation of some dalpaties, directions issued for preparation of seniority list of dalpaties of the district for the purposes for sending untrained for training and to ensure appointment of trained dalpaties on vacant posts of panchayat-sevaks.
2) - Letter No. 5448 dated 24.6.1989 of Special Secretary to all D.Ms. - An.-4 with CWJC No. 12679/03 - Out of total 11753 Panchayats, post Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 15/54 sanctioned in 11338. Steps being taken for creation of post of panchayat-sevaks in new 415 panchayats. Out of 11338, 671 posts of Panchayat-sevaks vacant all over State. For implementation of Jawahar Rojgar Yojna, immediate filling up of vacant posts of panchayat-sevaks required. Hence, Policy decision of Government for appointment of dalpaties on the vacant posts of panchayat- sevaks. Methodology laid down.
3) - Letter No. 603 dated 6.2.1993 of Director to all the D.Ms. - An.-8 with CWJC No. 12979/03 -
regarding age relaxation of dalpaties for their appointment as panchayat-sevaks in special cases.
4) - Letter No. 2995 dated 15.6.1994 of Director to all D.Ms. - An.-4 with CWJC No. 2429/06 - Ban on appointments, imposed on 12.9.1993 due to reorganization of panchayats, lifted as reorganization work almost complete.
Appointments to be made as laid down. Details of proposed gram-panchayats received from State Election Commission showing total existing gram-panchayats as 11959, proposed as 12071 and sanction posts of panchayat-sevaks as 11338.
5) - Letter No. 117 dated 30.9.1995 of Comm.-cum-
Secretary to all - An.-10 with CWJC No. 13582/05 - Regarding follow of roster in promotion and appointments.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 16/546) - Letter No. 3401 dated 9.7.1996 of Director to all D.Ms./ DDCs/ Regional Dy. Directors/District Panchayat Raj Officers - An.-3 with CWJC No. 2429/06 - Amendment by serial no. 3 in serial no. 1 and other amendments noticed. Order of the Court in a batch of cases noticed. Ban imposed on 6.11.1995 lifted and detailed directions issued for fixation of seniority of the dalpaties etc.
7) - Letter No. 2610 dated 20.8.1998 of Addl. Sec.
to Accountant General - An.-3/A with CWJC No. 17387/08 - creation of 843 extra posts of panchayat-sevaks. In terms of section 32 of the 1993 Act, each panchayat has to have one post of panchayat-sevak (secretary). After reorganization, total gram-panchayats 12181, against which 11330 posts already created. Hence decision to create remaining 843 (?) posts. Appointments to be made in three phases.
8) - Letter No. 693 dated 5.2.2000 of Director to all D.Ms./D.Cs. - An.-6 with CWJC No. 12797/03 - regarding strict compliance of earlier letter dated 17.9.1993 in the matter of age relaxation and consideration of cases of dalpaties for their appointment as panchayat-sevaks.
9) - Letter No. 10 dated 2.1.2001 of Secretary to all D.Ms. / DDCs - An.-7 with CWJC No. 3643/06
- In reply to guidelines being sought. 100% vacancies of panchayat-sevaks to be filled up from dalpaties. But before any selection Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 17/54 concurrence of Finance Dept. a must.
10) - Notification No. 2295 date 27.7.2001 containing order of Governor u/s 32(1) of 1993 Act - An.-6 with CWJC No. 12563/06 - All panchayat-sevaks to be appointed as panchayat- secretary in their respective panchayats. On remaining vacancies or on vacancies arising in future additional charge to secondary examination passed jansevaks or revenue karmchari till regular appointments are made.
11) - Notification dated 31.5.2003 containing Bihar Staff Selection Commission Rules 2003. - An.-7 with CWJC No. 12563/06.
12) - Letter No. 2157 dated 15.7.2003 of Secretary to all D.Ms. - An.-4/A with CWJC No. 2481/06 - In view of Bihar Staff Selection Commission Act, 2002 read with Bihar Staff Selection Commission Rules, 2003, appointments on the posts of panchayat-sevaks to be made on the recommendations of the Commission. Hence paragraph 6 of serial no. 2 above substituted accordingly.
13) - Resolution in memo no. 3619 dated 29.10.2003. - An.-A with CA in CWJC No. 15066/05 - Ban on appointments of panchayat- sevaks. Para 4 & 5 of notification at serial no. 10 deleted, 2 & 3 to remain in operation.
14) - Notification dated 15.1.2004. - An.-B with CA in CWJC No. 15066/05 - Bihar Gram Panchayat Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 18/54 (Appointment of Secretary, Rights and Duties) Rules, 2003.
15) - Letter No. 6139 dated 23.8.2004 of chief Secretary to all - An.-10 with CWJC No. 2481/06 - Ban lifted on appointments against non-plan vacancies continuing for more than 6 months.
17) - Letter No.512 dated 10.02.2006- An-F with counter affidavit of CWJC No.2182/06 of the Director to all concerned in reference to the order passed in CWJC No.14561 of 2003 informing that in the light of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Ordinance 2006, post of panchayat-sevak is not in existence and till new Rules are not framed, the procedure for filling up the post of panchayat-secretary shall continue to be governed by the Bihar Gram Panchayat (Appointment of Secretary, Right & Duties) Rules 2003, notified through Notification No.188 dated 15.1.2004 (serial no.14 above)
18) - Letter No. 1561 dated 28.3.2008 of Principal Secretary to all D.Ms. - An.-14 with IA No. 273/14 in CWJC No. 12679/03 - In view of orders of the Court in some cases in connection with appointment of dalpaties on the posts of panchayat-sevaks, to be complied with by 21.4.2008, directions issued to make preparation at the district level in terms of letter at serial 2 above and inform the department.
19) - Proceeding of a meeting dated 7.4.2008 Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 19/54 presided by Chief Secretary - An.-6 with CWJC No. 656/11 - Meeting convened for compliance of various orders of the Court including the order passed in L.P.A. No. 789/06 (State vs. Subhash Chandra Shukla). Review of preparations and steps to be taken.
20) - Letter No. 1954 dated 28.4.2008 of Principal Secretary to all D.Ms. - An.-15 with IA No. 273/14 in CWJC No. 12679/03 - In continuation of serial 18 above, fixing 23.8.1993 (effective date of 1993 Act) as cut-off date. dalpaties, appointed before that date and eligible, only to be considered for appointment as panchayat-sevak. Later appointees not to be considered.
21) - Letter No. 2815 dated 11.6.2008 of Principal Secretary to Accountant General - An.-B with CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 - Creation of 531 posts of panchayat-sevaks for compliance of orders of the Court. Out of the 843 post created by serial no. 8 above in un-divided Bihar, 531 posts in the share of divided Bihar. These 531 posts to be filled up from dalpaties, eligible and appointed prior to 23.8.1993, in compliance to the orders of the Court and not to be treated as precedence. In terms of paragraph 1 of notification no. 2295 dated 27.7.2001, such panchayat-sevaks, from their dates of postings, to be appointed as secretary of gram- panchayats.
Now panchayat-sevaks to be known as Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 20/54 panchayat-secretaries. 22) - Resolution in memo no. 5661 dated 2.9.2008 of
Adm. & Personnel Reforms Dept. - An.-12 with CWJC No. 15760/08 - Absorption of 1709 employees of dissolved Bihar State Agriculture Produce Marketing Board in different departments.
23) - Letter No. 5856 dated 21.10.2009 of Secretary to all D.Ms. - An-D with CA of CWJC No. 3649/06. In view of the order passed by the DB in Subhash Chandra Shukla case (LPA No. 789/06 = 11.08.2009), approving the proposal for filling up 531 vacancies from dalpaties, compliance of serial no. 21 above to be ensured. In the districts, were post of panchayat-sevaks not created by serial no.7 above, no appointment to be made from dalpaties.
24) - Notification No. 4738 dated 6.7.2011 - An.-J with CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 - Bihar Gram Panchayat (Appointment of Secretary, Rights and Duties) Rules, 2011.
25) - Letter No. 13 dated 2.1.2013 of Joint Director to Joint Sec., General Administration Dept. - An.-K with CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 -
statement of vacancies received from the D.Ms.in the light of 2011 Rule at serial no. 24 above, to be forwarded to the Secretary, Staff Selection Commission for the purposes of appointment.
26) - Letter No. 939 dated 21.2.2013 of the Director Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 21/54 to Joint Sec., G.A.D. - An.-K (part) with CA of CWJC No. 3649/06. - Same as serial no. 25 above in respect of vacancies of Vaishali Dist.
27) - Letter No. 4008 dated 29.6.2013 of Director to Principal Sec. G.A.D. - An.- K(part) with CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 - Reminder for serial 25 & 26 above as 3161 posts of panchayat-secretary lying vacant affecting developmental work.
28) - Letter No. 4009 dated 29.6.2013 of Director to Secretary, Staff Selection Commission - An.- K(part) with CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 - In reference of serial nos. 25, 26, 27 above, with request to take action for the purposes of appointments of panchayat-secretaries as vacancies adversely affecting developmental work.
3. The first document in the list above is a letter of the Director, Panchayati Raj of 1987, to the District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari from which it appears that some decision has been taken on the representation for appointment of trained dalpaties on vacant post of panchayat-sevaks. However, it was the letter of the Special Secretary of 1989, (at serial no.2 above), which clearly shows that, for the purposes of implementation of Jawahar Rojgar Yojna, the State Government decided to immediately appoint dalpaities on the vacant posts of panchayat-
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 22/54sevaks in different gram-panchayats and detailed methodology was laid down for it. The subsequent documents are in respect of age relaxation and some ban imposed on appointments and lifting of the ban and application of roster. Next letter is (at serial no.7 above) by which 843 extra posts were created, obviously in the light of re-organization of gram-panchayats done earlier by the State Election Commission, providing for one post of panchayat-sevak in each of the newly created gram-panchayat in terms of Section 32 of 1993 Act. This letter laid down that appointments on the posts had to be made in 3 phases. From the letter of the Secretary of the Department issued in 2001, as mentioned (at serial no.9 above), it appears that till then the Government policy to fill up all the vacancies of the panchayat-
sevaks from eligible dalpaties was still in force. The only rider in this letter was that before taking any decision, the concerned authorities were required to take concurrence of the Finance Department. However, soon thereafter it appears that the matter was reconsidered at the highest level and notification, (at serial no.10 above), was issued on 27.07.2001 under the orders of the Governor in exercise of his powers under Section 32 (1) of 1993 Act, a copy whereof is Annexure-6 with the records of CWJC No.12563 of 2006. This order of the Governor introduced Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 23/54 a complete change of policy in the matter of filling up of posts of panchayat-sevaks. It clearly laid down that all the panchayat-
sevaks, appointed till then, were to be appointed as panchayat-
secretaries in their respective panchayats. But it also laid down that in respect of the remaining vacancies of panchayat-
secretaries, or on vacancies arising in future, jan-sevaks, and in case of their unavailability, revenue-karmcharies, with qualification of matriculation, were to be given additional charge, in addition to their own responsibilities, till regular appointments were made of panchayat-secretaries against the vacancies. Thus, this order of the Governor, issued in exercise of his powers under sub-section (1) of Section 32 of the 1993 Act, completely shut down the scope of appointment of dalpaties on the post of panchayat-secretaries (sevaks) from the date of issue of the order itself. In terms of the Bihar Staff Selection Commission Act 2002, Bihar Staff Selection Commission Rules were framed and notified in 2003 by notification, (at serial no.11 above). This Rule though used the words „panchayat-sevak‟, but it contained a clear provision for appointment on the vacancy of panchayat-
sevak (secretary) through a selection process, to be held by the Commission. Hence, after issue of the said two notifications, a letter was issued by the Department to all the District Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 24/54 Magistrates, (at serial no.12 above), that appointments of panchayat-sevaks were to be made only on the basis of the recommendation of the Commission. Later on, in exercise of power under section 121 of 1993 Act, the Governor of Bihar framed the Bihar Gram Panchayat (Appointment of Secretary, Rights & Duties) Rules, 2003, which was notified on 15.01.2004, ( at serial no.14 above). This Rule incorporated the policy decision of the Government, notified under the orders of the Governor of Bihar on 27.07.2001, as referred to above, and gave it a force of legislation. From the letter dated 10.02.2006 of Director, Panchayati Raj (at serial no.17 above) it appears that after the Bihar Panchayat Raj Ordinance, 2006 was issued, legal position was made clear that post of panchayat-sevak was no longer in existence. Hence till new rules are passed appointments on the post of panchayat-secretary had to be made as per 2003 Rules (at serial no.14 above). The next relevant document in chronology on record, (at serial no.18 above), is a letter of the Principal Secretary to all the District Magistrates, which talks about Court orders and requirements for their compliance by appointment of respective dalpaties on the posts of panchayat-
sevaks by 21.04.2008. By this letter, directions were issued to them to make preparation for the purposes. From the document, Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 25/54 (at serial no.19 above), it appears that a meeting, presided over by the Chief Secretary, was also held on 07.04.2008 for that very purpose, taking into account the orders passed in contempt proceedings by this Court and orders passed by Division Bench.
The letter, (at serial no.20 above), shows that it was issued in continuation of the letter, (at serial no.18 above), clarifying that dalpaties appointed before 23.08.1993 (the date on which 1993 Act came into force) were only eligible to be appointed as panchayat-sevaks. It made clear that the later appointees were not to be considered. The letter of the Principal Secretary to the Accountant General, (at serial no.21 above), shows that for compliance of the orders of the Courts, out of 843 posts created by the letter, (at serial not. 7 above), 531 posts fell in the share of the present State of Bihar after its bifurcation. Hence Accountant General was informed that all these posts were to be filled up from dalpaties appointed prior to 23.08.1993 for the purpose of compliance of the orders of this Court and it was not to be treated as precedents and, in terms of the Governor‟s order contained in the notification, (at serial no.10 above), only such panchayat-
sevaks, from their date of postings, were to be appointed as secretary of the respective gram-panchayat and panchayat-
sevaks, henceforth, were to be known as panchayat-secretaries.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 26/54The Resolution dated 02.09.2008, (at serial no.22 above), is in respect of absorption of 1709 employees of dissolved Bihar State Agriculture Produce Marketing Board in different departments.
The next document, (at serial no.35 above), is the letter of the Secretary of the Department to all the District Magistrates taking into account the judgment of the Division Bench in the case of Subhas Chandra Shukla (supra) and its approval for filling up 531 vacancies from dalpaties. The letter made it clear that in the panchayats, where no post of panchayat-sevak was created, no appointment should be made. It appears that after 2006 Act replaced the 1993 Act and came into force, a fresh Rule was framed by the State Government in exercise of powers under Section 146 of 2006 Act in respect of appointment, powers and duties of the panchayat-secretaries which was notified on 06.07.2011. In this Rule also original policy decision, earlier notified, (at serial no.10 above), was incorporated and reiterated.
Rest of the four letters in chronology, (at serials no.25, 26, 27 and 28 above), are letters to the Staff Selection Commission, forwarding the vacancies of panchayat-secretaries received from the districts, totaling to 3161, and informing that, on account of the posts lying vacant, development works were being adversely affected.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 27/544. With the writ applications, several orders of this Court passed by learned Single Judges or by the Division Benches have also been brought on record. This Court has prepared a list of such orders also in chronology which are as follows: -
Item Nos. Contents
1) - Order of CWJC No. 7314/90 (19.3.1991 - DB)
- With CWJC No.2429/06 - Cancellation of
appointment of petitioner as dalpati quashed by DB on the ground that once having been appointed, after 3 years it cannot be cancelled on the ground that he did not had requisite height and measurement of chest. Earlier orders of Court on similar lines noticed.
2) - Order of CWJC No. 3634/94 (15.2.1995- SJ) -
With CWJC No. 15760/08 - Parties agreed that appointment of panchayat-sevaks had to be made from the dalapaties fulfilling requisite conditions, for which a list had already been prepared, and only then remaining vacancies could be filled from outside. But insistence by Department of revenue to appoint retrenched employees. Since a Government circular existed laying down manner of appointment of panchayat-sevaks, it must be given full effect, unless there is a change in it. Directions issued to take final decision with regard to appointment of petitioners within one month.
3) - Order of CWJC No. 7935/94, 4561/95 & Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 28/54 4025/95 (27.7.1995 - SJ) - With CWJC No. 18263/08 - Held, the Resolution dated 31.3.1992, providing for all appointments on class III posts through BPSC, being general in nature, not applicable in matters of appointment of panchayat-sevaks from amongst dalapaties and Circular dated 24.6.1989, providing specifically for the same, will prevail. Held further that said Circular does not provide for sending the trained dalapaties again for training. Hence direction for payment of salary / issue of appointment letters to the petitioners, who were sent for training, in spite of they being already trained.
4) - Order of CWJC No. 11078/96 (4.12.96 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 15066/05 - Section 32 of the Act, providing for creation of one post of panchayat-sevak in each panchayat, is mandatory. Hence direction issued to create 23 posts in remaining 23 panchayats of Gopalganj district. Similar order in respect of Khagaria district and its compliance noticed.
5) - Order of CWJC No. 3958/96 (8.7.1997 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 12679/03 - Grievance that District Magistrate, Begusarai likely to allocate more than 50% of vacancies of panchayat-sevaks for reserved categories. Directed to make appointments strictly in accordance with directions of the Court noticed earlier and the decision of the Government in the memo no. 117 Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 29/54 dated 30.9.1995 of Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms.
6) - Order of CWJC No. 8655/97 (3.2.98 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 15066/05 - Directions issued in respect of district of West Champaran on the lines of order dated 4.12.1996 passed in CWJC No. 11078/96.
7) - CWJC No. 10793/96 (4.2.1998 - SJ) - With
CWJC No. 12258/2K - Though no
supplementary affidavit filed by State but, on the basis of roaster cleared by the Commissioner, held that out of 29 posts of panchayat-sevaks, 3 vacancies required to be filled up by BC candidates. Hence orders issued to District Magistrate to consider the case of the petitioner.
8) - Order of CWJC No. 4306/98 (1.7.1998 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 15760/08 - Section 32 is mandatory. Hence direction issued to create 74 more posts of panchayat-sevaks in the remaining panchayats of Muzaffarpur district and make recruitments in accordance with law. Order in the case of Khagaria district and its compliance noticed.
9) - Order of CWJC No. 543/98 (10.8.1998 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 16281/06 - Disposed of with liberty to petitioners to file representation for relaxation of age as matter of appointment on the post of panchayat-sevak was pending in Vaishali district since July 1996.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 30/5410) - Order of CWJC No. 11821/97 (12.8.1999 - SJ)
- With CWJC No. 18263/08 - Following two earlier orders of the Court, District Magistrate directed to consider representation of petitioner for payment of salary of training period also and pass orders as passed in similarly situated cases.
11) - Order of CWJC No. 6837/98 (4.8.1998 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 16281/06 - Disposed of with liberty to petitioners to file representation for relaxation of age as matter of appointment on the post of panchayat-sevak was pending in Vaishali district since 1996.
12) - Order of CWJC No. 8574/98 (9.12.1999 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 12258/2K - Petitioner not within the zone of consideration first time, becoming over age subsequently. Disposed of with liberty to move the Director, Panchayati Raj for age relaxation.
13) - Order of CWJC No. 10730/2K (9.11.2001 -
SJ) - With CWJC No. 12679/03 - Disposed of with direction to consider pending representation for age relaxation in terms of Government decision contained in memo no. 693 dated 5.2.2000, in view of vacancies being available, and adopt similar yardstick as adopted in other cases.
14) - Order of CWJC No. 15933/2K (13.12.2001 -
SJ) - With CWJC No. 12679/03 - Similar order like item no. 13.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 31/5415) - Order of CWJC No. 8954/02 (14.8.2002 - SJ)
- With CWJC No. 15066/05 - No fault in the letter of Finance Department laying down to seek prior approval before convening the meeting of selection committee for appointment of panchayat-sevaks. Writ dismissed.
16) - Order of CWJC No. 11395/02 (16.12.2002 -
SJ) - With CWJC No. 15066/05 - Deputation of respondent, a VLW, as panchayat-secretary, as a temporary measure in terms of Rural Development Department notification dated 27.7.2001, providing 3 modes of temporary arrangement till regular appointments, held valid. Petitioner only entitled for compensatory allowance in terms of Rule 103 of Bihar Service Code.
17) - Order of CWJC No. 1902/03 (8.4.2003 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 12797/03 - Petitioners‟ cases for appointment as panchayat-sevaks not considered, though 95 vacancies available in Aurangabad district. Government stand that due to heavy financial burden of Rs.13.20 crores involved, decision taken to fill up posts of panchayat-sevaks on deputation from VLWs and halka karmcharies as interim measure in terms of notification no. 2295 dated 27.7.2001, not accepted. Direction to consider cases of petitioners, trained dalapaties.
18) - Order of CWJC No. 13197/03 (6.4.2004 - SJ) -
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 32/54With CWJC No. 15066/05 - In view of the stand of respondents that due to resource crunch, Government had decided not to fill up posts of panchayat-sevaks from trained dalpatis, no mandamus can be issued. However, petitioner may represent.
19) - Order of CWJC No. 7652/02 (19.1.2005 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 2481/06 - 2nd round by petitioners of item no. 4. Case of petitioners accepted that they have been waiting for compliance of the earlier orders of this Court in their favour, as in item no. 4 above. However a ban was imposed on appointments on class IV posts due to financial stringency. Now that ban has been revoked under Chief Secretary letter no. 6139 dated 23.8.2004 issued by the Finance Dept., the Bihar Gram Panchayat (Appointment of Secretary, Rights and Duties) Rules 2003, notified through notification no. 188 dated 15.1.2004, cannot be validly made operative retrospectively w.e.f. 27.7.2001, as requirements of sections 121(2) and 142 of the Act not fulfilled. Hence writ application allowed. Respondent directed to complete the process of appointments of panchayat-sevaks in Gopalganj district by complying the orders of the Court as in item no. 4 above.
20) - Order of CWJC No. 6132/99 (17.3.2005 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 16281/06 - Denial of case of Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 33/54 petitioner of serial no. 9 above on the ground that he was at serial no. 15 in the list but vacancies were 14 only as on 9.10.1998, found wrong on facts. Hence direction to consider his case on 15th vacancy and give relaxation of age as directed earlier.
21) - Order of CWJC No. 15723/01 (21.3.2005 - SJ)
- With CWJC No. 18263/08 - As petitioner had completed training and ban had been lifted, disposed of with liberty to file representation for appointment and posting as panchayat-sevak in the light of earlier order of the Court.
22) - Order of L.P.A. No. 1042/05 (21.9.2005 - DB)
- With CWJC No. 2481/06 - Appeal against order as in item no. 19, misconceived. Dismissed.
23) - Order of CWJC No. 14561/03 and analogous
cases (3.1.2006 - DB) - with CWJC
No.15760/08 Case of petitioners noticed that if they would have been appointed on the vacant post of panchayat-sevaks under the 1947 Act, they would have become panchayat-secretaries under the 1993 Act. Case of respondents noticed that after 1993 Act there is no post of panchayat- sevak and in terms of resolution no. 3619 of 29.10.2003 no new appointment of panchayat- sevak can be made and only those working can continue as panchayat-secretary and in terms of Notification No.2295 dated 27.7.2001 vacant post of panchayat-secretary is to be filled up by Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 34/54 VLW/revenue karmachari as working arrangement. However, as agreed between the parties, all writ applications disposed of with direction to consider the cases of the petitioners for appointment on the post of panchayat-sevaks, if decision is taken in future for appointment of panchayat-sevaks in future.
24) - Order of CWJC No. 1021 of 2000 (03.03.2006- SJ) - With CWJC No. 2481 of 2006 - held that since under 1993 Act, the post of panchayat- sevak has not been retained and the post of panchayat-secretary has been created, all the circulars and orders issued in terms of 1947 Act for appointment of dalpaties to the post of panchayat-secretary stood wiped out and the post of panchayat-sevak lost its legislative sanction. Even if the guidelines to facilitate appointment on the post of panchayat-secretary are not issued, circulars issued by the Government for filling up the posts of panchayat-sevaks by dalpaties cannot be applied for filling up the post of panchayat- secretaries by dalpati. Further held that until such time the Government takes a policy decision that dalpaties shall be appointed as panchayat- secretaries, till then dalpaties cannot seek to be appointed as panchayat-secretaries. Held that if such appointments are still being made, the appointing authority and the appointees are exposing themselves to very complications Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 35/54 including criminal proceeding. Prayer of the petitioner for appointment as panchayat-secretary is rejected. The application is dismissed.
25) - Order of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 639/07 (31.1.2007)
- With CWJC No. 656/11 - Special Leave petition against order item no. 22 above dismissed by Supreme Court on account of delay as well as on merits.
26) - Order of MJC No. 638/06 (18.92008 - DB) -
Disobedience of order under item no. 23 above alleged. Noticed that the 3 orders, dated 28.3.2008, 28.4.2008 & 8.7.2008, showed Government decision to appoint panchayat- sevaks from dalpaties on the basis of seniority list. Disposed of with direction to strictly adhere to said order dated 3.1.2006 (item 23 above) and the said 3 orders for filling up the posts of panchayat-sevaks. No appointment of panchayat- sevaks to be made without adhering to the said orders.
27) - Order of CWJC No. 13598/01 (26.9.2008 - SJ)
- With CWJC No. 12679/03 - By the time age relaxation was granted by the Director to the petitioners, District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur had completed the process of appointment. Following an earlier order of the Court, direction issued to appoint them as per existing Rule in 1999 from the dates their juniors were appointed, with seniority etc, but without pay.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 36/5428) - Order of L.P.A. No. 789/06 - State vs. Subhash Chandra Shukla (11.8.2009 - DB) - With CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 - Against order dated 20.1.2005 passed in CWJC No. 6243/2K (not available in records of any case of this batch - ?). Held that, in view of the legal position obtaining as on the date, a dalpati cannot, as a matter of right, be considered for appointment as panchayat-secretary. Question, as to whether panchayat-secretary is successor in office of panchayat-sevak, not considered. As submitted, dalpaties, not exceeding 531 allowed to be appointed/promoted to the post of panchayat- sevak/secretary in different panchayats of the State whose names have been approved by the Staff Selection Commission. For them the State Government shall not keep in mind the distinction between panchayat-sevak and secretary. The distinction shall depend on the rules to be framed. Submissions raised on behalf of the petitioners in the present batch of cases, raised before Division Bench also and noticed.
29) - Order of CWJC No. 6977/2K (12.11.2009 -
DB) - With CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 - Prayer for direction for relaxation of age, to consider petitioner amongst the 531, as juniors were included and appoint as panchayat-
sevak/secretary, rejected in the light of findings in item no. 28 that dalpaties are not eligible to be Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 37/54 appointed as panchayat-sevaks/secretaries and the 531 were allowed to be appointed because of specific orders of this Court in their matters.
30) - Order of MJC No. 1957/07 and other MJCs (30.3.2010 - SJ) - With CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 - dismissed due to observation and findings of the DB in item no. 28.
31) - Order of MJC No. 2581/09 (7.4.2010 - SJ) -
With CWJC NO. 656/11 - Refusal from appointment on account of want of vacancies. Since in order dated 19.7.2005 in CWJC No. 15462/04 number of vacancies available prior to the coming of the Rules in force from 15.1.04 not notice, contempt application disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to get a declaration in respect of vacancies available prior to it.
32) - Order of MJC No. 3426/10 and other cases (19.4.11 - DB) - With CA of CWJC No. 3649/06
- Contempt of item no. 23 above. Held that the claims of the petitioners could not be considered unless they showed that as dalpaties they came to this Court earlier and had acquired a right which binds the State Government to appoint them by way of exception as per Division Bench judgment (in item no. 28 above). The order dated 3.1.2006 was merely an order for their consideration on happening of certain contingency in future. Absorption of some surplus staff of Marketing Board was not Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 38/54 „appointment‟. Dismissed.
33) - Order of MJC No. 3171/09 (19.4.2011 - DB) -
With CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 - Contempt of order dated 1.3.2005 passed in a writ matter. Direction was to work out vacancy position of 22 vacancies as per reservation policy and then proceed to fill them up. In appeal, order modified that if post of panchayat-sevak did not exist, respondents may not be bound to fill up the post. Petitioner‟s case re-considered but found over age. Recommendation sent to the department for age relaxation remained pending. In view of order in item no. 32 above and in view of the order in appeal, application dismissed.
34) - Order of MJC No. 4270/09 (20.7.2011 - SJ) -
With CWJC No. 16281/06 - In view of judgment of the Court in L.P.A. No. 789/06, petitioner‟s remedy is a fresh writ application in respect of controversies of vacancies, replacement of nomenclature etc. Since petitioner‟s case admittedly considered by District Magistrate, Bhojpur, application disposed of.
35) - Order of MJC No. 3481/11 (9.4.2012 - DB) -
With CA of CWJC No. 3649/06 - Contempt of order dated 10.8.2007 passed in a writ matter affirmed by DB on 18.5.2011. Court had held that authorities were obliged to fill up all vacant posts of panchayat-sevaks (secretaries) created under letter no. 2610 dated 20.8.1998 which was Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 39/54 done pursuant to order dated 4.12.1996 passed in CWJC No. 11078/96. OPs produced a letter dated 11.6.2008 to show that by letter dated 20.8.1998 total 843 posts had been created for undivided Bihar, out of which 531 posts related to successor State of Bihar. In the letter creating 843 new posts, 298 posts were shown as already existing in Siwan and on account of reorganization 5 posts became excess. Hence out of the 531 new post remaining in the successor State of Bihar, no post was available in Siwan. Hence in the light of DB order as in item no. 28, application dismissed.
5. From the orders it is apparent that initially different Benches of this Court noticed policy decision of the Government, (at serial no.2 above), and held that the same had to be followed.
It was also noticed that Section 32 of the Act was mandatory and each panchayat had to have one panchayat-sevak. Certain orders are in respect of individual cases of respective petitioners and in respect of particular district also. This does not have much bearing on the core issue raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners in these cases i.e., as to whether any right was vested in the dalpaties for their appointment as panchayat-sevaks in view of the policy decision of the Government, (at serial no.2 above), and whether the same is still continuing irrespective of Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 40/54 the changes in law and policy and enactment of new acts and rules having come into force. From the order of the learned Single Judge dated 14.08.2002, (in item no.15 above), it appears that the letter of the Secretary of the Department, (at serial no.9 above), laying down prior approval of the Finance Department, was considered and held as correct. Thereafter in another order, (in item no.16 above), a learned Single Judge held that the notification issued under the orders of the Governor on 27.07.2001, (at serial no.10 above), was valid. Item no.19 is an order of a learned Single Judge in a fresh writ petition preferred by petitioners of item no.4 in which the learned Single Judge held that there was a ban earlier which had been lifted by the Chief Secretary‟s letter dated 23.08.2004, (at serial no.15 above), but the Bihar Gram Panchayat (Appointment of Secretary, Rights and Duties) Rules 2003, notified through notification (at serial no.14 above), cannot be made operative retrospectively as it did not fulfill the requirements of Section 121(2) and 142 of the Act.
Hence, directions were issued to the authorities of Gopalganj District to complete the process of appointment of panchayat-
sevaks in compliance to the order, (in item no.4 above).
6. An important order of a Division Bench dated 03.01.2006 in a batch of cases is (in item no.23 above), which shows that a Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 41/54 plea had been raised that had the petitioners been appointed on the vacant post of panchayat-sevaks under the 1947 Act, they would have become panchayat-secretaries under the 1993 Act.
The Division Bench noticed the case of the respondents that after 1993 Act there was no any post of panchayat-sevak and, in terms of the notification dated 27.07.2001, (at serial no.10 above), and the resolution dated 29.10.2003, (at serial no.13 above), no new appointment of panchayat-sevaks could be made from dalpaties and only working arrangement was possible in terms of the said policy till vacancies of panchayat-secretaries were filled up in accordance with law. In view of this stand of the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioners agreed for a consented order on the basis of which writ applications were disposed of directing the concerned respondents to consider the cases of petitioners for appointment on the post of panchayat-
sevaks if in future a decision was taken by the Government for appointment of panchayat-sevaks. From the order, (in item no.26 above), it appears that contempt applications were filed for disobedience of the orders of the batch of cases, (in item no.23 above), which were disposed of with a direction for strict adherence to the said order of the Division Bench noticing the letters of the Principal Secretary, (at serial nos. 18 and 20), and Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 42/54 some other letters. In an order dated 03.03.2006 (in item no.24 above) a learned Single Judge gave categorical findings and conclusively held that even if after 1993 Rules any dalpati was appointed as panchayat-secretary, the appointing authority and the appointee were exposing themselves to great complications as all circulars and order issued under the 1947 Act stood wiped out after the 1993 Act came into force which did not recognize any post of panchayat-sevak. An important order of the Division Bench having significant bearing on the issue before this Court is an order dated 11.08.2009 passed in LPA. No.789 of 2006 (State of Bihar Vs. Subhash Chandra Shukla) (in item no.28 above). Subsequent orders i.e. order of the Division Benches, (in item nos. 29, 32, 33 and 35 above), and the orders of the learned Single Judges, (in item nos.30 and 34 above), were passed taking note of the said order of the Division Bench passed in LPA No.789 of 2006, (in item no.28 above).
7. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, learned counsel, who appears for the petitioners in all these cases, and as it appears from the previous orders that he had appeared in most of the earlier writ applications preferred in this Court by dalpaties, has, in writing, raised certain issues for consideration, as available on record, by this Court in this batch of writ applications. They are reproduced Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 43/54 herein below:-
" 1. Change of Nomenclature of a post will not amount to abolition of the earlier post unless there is change in Duty and functional of the post.
2. In absence of Statutory rule for appointment on the post the Govt. has power to issue executive orders for the process of appointment, having the same value.
3. The post of Panchayat-sevak was created and allocated in each district as per the number of Panchayat as substantive post to be appointed/ designated as secretary of the Panchayat.
4. If the Statutory provisions are unworkable, the States executive power cannot be ousted and their can issue executive orders for appointment/promotion.
5. That till 2011 no statutory rule has been made for appointment of Panchayat-secretary, accept 2003 Rule Notified on 15.01. 2004 for deputation of employees on the said post so vacancy occurred till July, 2011 be filled up as per old procedure to complete appointment process started for filling of post of Panchayat-sevak by letter dated 28.03.2008.
6. That the Ratio of a Judgment in binding. The Judgment in Subhash Chandra Shukla cases is not an authoritative pronouncement rather on the basis of the concession given by State Govt. appointing 531 persons.Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 44/54
7. That circular relating to appointment on the post of Panchayat-sevak in year 1989 amended in 2003 still saved under 2011 Panchayat-secretary Rule.
8. That stands of the State Govt. to only appoint those Dalpaties who have order of the Hon‟ble Court and not to others is against the Right to equal treatment under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
9. That stands of State to only fill up additionally created post of Panchayat-sevak in 1998 and in the District where the number of Panchayat Incharge and not the entire vacancy of reallocated Cadre strength is without any policy and hit by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. "
8. Since in writing issues have been raised by Mr. Roy in these cases, it would be appropriate for this Court to deal the same one by one. So far as first point in respect of the change of nomenclature, obviously from panchayat-sevak to panchayat-
secretary, is concerned, the same is not at all relevant in these matters. Whether the post of panchayat-secretary is altogether separate post or only a substitute of the post of panchayat-sevak does not affect the claim of the petitioners-dalpaties either way.
This question was raised by Mr. Roy on behalf of the respondents/writ petitioners before the Division Bench in LPA Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 45/54 No.789 of 2006, which after making the legal position, as on the date, clear that a dalpati could not, as a matter of right, be considered for appointment as panchayat-secretary, in paragraph 14 of the judgment, did not find it necessary to decide the question as to whether post of panchayat-secretary was a successor-in-office of the post of panchayat-sevak, or not.
However, later on, the Division Bench, while permitting the State Government to make appointments of not exceeding 531 dalpaties, directed the State Government to ignore the distinction between the panchayat-sevak and panchayat-secretary. It may be reiterated that the core issue in these cases, upon which the decision on all other issues hinges, is as to whether any right was vested in the dalpaties for their appointment as panchayat-sevaks in view of the policy decision of the Government, (at serial no.2 above), and whether the same is still continuing irrespective of the changes in law and policy and enactments of new acts and rules having come into force, or not.
9. So far as second issue raised by Mr. Roy is concerned, it is correct to say that in absence of statutory rules for appointment to the post, Government has power to issue executive orders.
But, as noticed earlier, from the documents available on record, it is apparent that later on, policy decisions were taken and orders Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 46/54 were issued by the Governor in exercise of his powers under sub-
section (1) of Section 32 of the Act, as far back as on 27.07.2001 (in serial no.10 above), for handing over the charge of existing and future vacancies of panchayat-sevaks to jan-sevaks or revenue karmcharies till regular appointments were made on the posts. This notification had a statutory force and obviously it superseded any executive instructions issued earlier for filling up of posts of panchayat-sevaks from dalpaties. Hence, from this date onwards, any claim of dalpaties, whatsoever, of a right to be appointed on the vacant posts of panchayat-sevaks, if at all by letter dated 24.06.1989, (at serial no.2 above), got extinguished.
Soon thereafter, Staff Selection Commission Act and Rules came into existence, by which the Commission, by law, was entrusted with the function to select and recommend names for appointment on the posts of panchayat-sevaks/secretaries. Thus the submissions of Mr. Roy that the said letter, (in serial no.2 above), still holds the field, has no substance and is rejected.
10. Issue no. 3 above is not an issue and is only a statement of fact emerging from the circulars / letters / resolutions / notifications and needs no findings.
11. Issue no.4 raised by Mr. Roy, as above, has not been elaborated by him during the arguments and he has not advanced Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 47/54 any argument and totally failed to demonstrate as to which statutory provision/notification/act/rule was „unworkable‟ and in what manner, to enable this Court to come to the conclusion that the circulars and orders issued under the 1947 Act and in particular letter no.5448 dated 24.06.1989 is still alive and operative. To the contrary, the provision of Section 14 of the Bihar Gram Panchayat (Appointment of Secretary, Rights and Duties) Rules, 2011 (at serial no.24 above) is clearly in teeth of all other provisions of the said Rules and is ultra-virus the Rules and held as such and is held „unworkable‟. It may be pointed out that in the order dated 03.03.2006 (in item no. 24 above) a leaned Single Judge has categorically held that after 1993 Act came into force, not recognizing any post of panchayat-sevak in panchayats, all the circulars and orders issued in terms of 1947 Act for appointment of dalpaties to the post of panchayat-secretary (sevak ?) stood wiped out and the post of panchayat-sevak lost its legislative sanction. It was also held that unless a policy decision is taken in the matter, dalpaties cannot seek to be appointed panchayat-secretaries. It also held that any such appointment may create complications, including criminal proceeding.
12. Issue no.5 raised by Mr. Roy is only on account of his Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 48/54 misconception and on account of his overlooking the said notification, (at serial no.10 above), and the change in policy effected by it. As already made clear above, the notification dated 27.07.2001, containing the orders of the Governor of Bihar in terms of the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 32 of the Act, had statutory force and it superseded said letter dated 24.6.1989, (at serial no. 2 above) and extinguished all the claims of dalpaties on the post of panchayat-sevaks as a matter of right.
Soon thereafter Bihar Staff Selection Commission Act came into force in 2002 and Rules were framed in 2003 which provided for appointment on the post of panchayat-sevaks from open market on the basis of the recommendation of the Commission.
13. Again issue no.6, raised by Mr. Roy is on account of total misreading of the Division Bench judgment in the case of State of Bihar vs. Subhash Chandra Shukla (supra). The Division Bench, after discussing the provisions of 1947 Act in respect of the constitution of the Village Voluntary Force, the provisions of 1993 Act and also provisions of 2006 Act, in very categorical terms, in concluding lines of paragraph 13, held as follows: -
"... We are, therefore, clearly of the view that in view of the legal position obtaining as on date, a Dalpati can not as a matter of right be considered for appointment as Panchayat-secretary. In that view of the matter, we also reject the contention advanced on behalf of the writ petitioners that it Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 49/54 will be open to the State Government to fill up the posts of Panchayat-secretaries from the open market, only if not available from amongst the Dalpatis."
14. For coming to this finding, the Division Bench noticed that a dalpati was only to head a Gram Raksha Dal which was an amorphous body of all able-bodied persons and was not the holder of a civil post and also came to the conclusion that nature of duties and functions of panchayat-secretary is vastly different from that of a dalpati. This is so clear finding of the Division Bench in its judgment that it puts a death knell to any claim of dalpaties for consideration of their cases for appointment on the post of panchayat-sevaks (now known as „panchayat-secretary‟).
With this finding, the Division Bench permitted the respondents to make appointment on not more than 531 vacancies of panchayat-sevaks from amongst dalpaties only as an exception, in view of the stand of the respondents that this was necessitated because of the various orders of the Court. From the observations of the Division Bench in paragraph 16 of the judgment, it will be clear that this permission of the Court was not a concession but was granted only by way of exception to the rule laid down in the judgment. The Court said thus :-
"Learned Advocate General has further submitted that the figure of 531 has been arrived because Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 50/54 those Dalpaties had approached this court by way of various writ petition and orders have been passed in their favour. Let it be made clear that such an action may not necessarily have our stamp of approval, but we permit the State Government to so appoint/promote them because the various orders of this court have attained finality. We wish to further clarify that only those Dalpatis, not exceeding 531 persons, would be appointed/promoted to the post of Panchayat- sevak/Secretary in different Panchayats of the State whose names have been approved by the Staff Selection Commission."
15. Issue No.7 raised by Mr. Roy, has been answered in clear terms while dealing with issue no.4 above and hence does not need further consideration.
16. Issue no.8, raised by Mr. Roy in respect of right to equal treatment, in terms of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and the claim of violation of that right of the rest of the dalpaties, on account of the stand of the State Government before the Division Bench in respect of appointment of only those dalpaties who had some orders of this Court in their favour, may have some substance. But none of the present writ applications is properly framed by impleading the appointees, juniors in the seniority list, as respondents for proper adjudication of the issue by this Court.
17. Through Issue No.9, Mr. Roy has questioned the Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 51/54 propriety of the stand of the respondents, as reflecting from the letter dated 20.08.1998 (at serial no.7 above), containing a decision to fill up only newly created posts of panchayat-sevaks has no legs to stand now, in view of the subsequent changes in the policy by the said order of the Governor contained in the said notification dated 27.07.2001 (at serial no.10 above), and the notification dated 15.01.2004 (at serial no.14 above), containing Bihar Gram Panchayat (Appointment of Secretary, Rights and Duties) Rules, 2003 and the 2011 Rules. In view of these subsequent developments, any challenge to the said letter dated 20.08.1998 (at serial 7 above) is meaningless.
18. In support of the issue, Mr. Roy has also strongly argued that the procedure laid down for appointment on the post of panchayat-sevak from dalpati by the said letter dated 20.08.1998 (at serial no.7) still holds good with its amendment, and that there was no regular appointment on the posts of panchayat-
sevaks, re-designated as panchayat-secretary. Hence, the procedure laid down in that letter should be adopted for filling up the posts of panchayat-secretaries even now. In support of these submissions, Mr. Roy has relied upon certain judgments in respect of the change of nomenclature and creation of posts which need no consideration by this Court in view of the fact that Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 52/54 the in the background of developments in the legal position emerging from analysis of the documents available on record in chronological order, it is clear that, whatsoever claim the dalpaties had in respect of their appointments on the post of panchayat-sevaks, got completely wiped out on account of the orders of the Governor passed in exercise of his powers under sub-section (1) of Section 32 of the 1993 Act notified through notification 27.07.2001 (at serial no.11 above), which had statutory force, and as consequence of which all the earlier executive orders of the Government, including the said letter dated 24.06.1989, got superseded and lost their force, which has been categorically held earlier also by a learned Single Judge in his order dated 03.03.2006 (as item no.24 above). Thereafter statutory provisions were made in the Act and Rules in respect of the Staff Selection Commission for appointment on the post of panchayat-sevaks from open market on the recommendations of the Commission. This position in law was made clear by the Department also through its letter no.512 dated 10.02.2006 (as serial no.17 above). As it has been made clear above also, it may be reiterated that permission to the respondents to appoint dalpaties on 531 posts of panchayat-sevaks / secretaries was only by way of exception to the rule laid down by the Division Bench Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 53/54 that dalpaties had no right to be considered for appointment as panchayat-secretary.
19. It may be pointed out that, it is a misconception amongst the petitioners, as canvassed by Mr. Roy on their behalf, and is a misreading of the Government letters and circulars that initial provisions for appointment of dalpaties on the posts of panchayat-sevaks was a promotion. Except for in one letter (as at serial no.6 above), this Court has failed to find the word ' ' used in any other document in context of appointment of dalpati to the post of panchayat-sevaks.
20. This Court has got enquiries made from NIC Office in the High Court premises and has been informed that till now no special leave petition has been filed in the Hon‟ble Supreme Court by the writ petitioners, who were represented by Mr. Roy, against the judgment of the Division Bench dated 11.08.2009 passed in LPA no.789 of 2006 (State of Bihar Vs. Subhash Chandra Shukla). Hence, the concluded finding of the Division Bench that " a Dalpati can not as a matter of right be considered for appointment as Panchayat-secretary", holds good and is binding upon this Court.
21. To conclude, as discussed above, the provisions of Rule 14 of the Bihar Gram Panchayat (Appointment of Secretary, Patna High Court CWJC No.12679 of 2003 (11) dt.19-09-2014 54/54 Rights and Duties) Rules 2011 is held „unworkable‟ and ultra-
virus other provisions of the said Rule.
22. As a result, all these 17 writ applications are held as devoid of merits. They are dismissed.
(Jayanandan Singh, J) B.T/-
U