Patna High Court - Orders
Ramdeo Thakur vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 16 July, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.10051 of 2010
1. PUJA PRIYA W/O PANKAJ KUMAR R/O VILL.- SUKHASAN, P.S.-
SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA.
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT,
NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA
3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHEPURA
4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, MADHEPURA
5. THE MEMBER, DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT APPELLATE
AUTHORITY, MADHEPURA
6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SINGHESHWAR, MADHEPURA
7. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, SINGHESHWAR,
MADHEPURA
8. THE MUKHIA, GRAM PANCHAYAT, SUKHASAN, SINGHESHWAR,
MADHEPURA
9. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, SUKHASAN GRAM PANCHAYAT,
SINGHESHWAR, MADHEPURA
10. THE SRI AMARNATH BHAGAT, EX-PANCHAYAT SEVAK, SUKHASAN
GRAM PANCHAYAT, SINGHESHWAR, MADHEPURA (PRESENTLY
POSTED AS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY BHAWANIPUR GRAM
PANCHAYAT, SINGHESHWAR).
---------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh.
Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh.
For the State : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar.
----------
WITH
CWJC No.9912 of 2010
1. ANITA GUHA D/O SRI MAHENDRA NARAYAN YADAV R/O VILL
SUKHASAN, P.S.SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA, PRESENTLY
POSTED AS PANCHAYAT TEACHER IN THE NAV SHRIJIT PRATHMIK
VIDYALAYA, RAMTOLA, GRAM PANCHAYAT SUKHASAN WITHIN
SINGHESHWAR ANCHAL IN THE DISTRICT OF MADHEPURA
2. RABINDRA KUMAR RAMAN S/O LATE JITENDRA NARAYAN R/O
VILL SUKHASAN, P.S.SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA, PRESENTLY
POSTED AS PANCHAYAT TEACHER IN THE NAV SHRIJIT PRATHMIK
VIDYALAYA, SHEO DAYALPUR UNDER GRAM PANCHAYAT
SUKHASAN WITHIN SINHESHWAR ANCHAL IN THE DISTRICT OF
MADHEPURA
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA
3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR,
PATNA
4. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER KOSHI DIVISION, SAHARSA
-2-
5. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KOSHI
DIVISION, SAHARSA
6. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER MADHEPURA
7. THE DISTRICT CO-ORDINATOR -CUM-DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT
OF EDUCATION MADHEPURA
8. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MADHEPURA
9. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER MADHEPURA
10. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-
MADHEPURA
11. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER SINGHESHWAR,
DISTT-MADHEPURA
12. SMT. SAMA DEVI W/O SRI MANOJ KUMAR @ RAGHU RAI R/O VILL
SUKHASAN, P.S.SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA, PRESENTLY
WORKING AS ELECTED MUKHIYA OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, SUKHASAN,
P.S.SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA
13. SMT. SUNIAT DEVI W/O SRI DASHRATH THAKUR R/O VILL
SUKHASAN, P.S.SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-
MADHEPURA
14. SRI RAVINDRA RAM S/O NOT KNOWN THE THEN PANCHAYAT
SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT , SUKHASAN, P.S.SINGHESHWAR,
DISTT-MADHEPURA
15. SRI AMAR NATH BHAGAT S/O NOT KNOWN THE THEN PANCHAYAT
SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT , SUKHASAN, P.S.SINGHESHWAR,
DISTT-MADHEPURA
16. SRI BINAY KUMAR RAM S/O NOT KNOWN PRESENTLY WORKING
AS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT , SUKHASAN,
P.S.SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA
17. SRI SANTOSH KUMAR S/O SRI GANESH KUMAR MEHTA R/O VILL
SUKHASAN, P.S.SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA
18. THE DISTRICT TEACHERS EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY
MADHEPURA.
WITH
CWJC No.9918 of 2010
1. NUTAN KUMARI ALIAS NUTAN KUMAR D/O SHRI GAJENDRA
PRASAD YADAV R/O VILL.- SUKHASAN, P.S.- SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.-
MADHEPURA, PRESENTLY POSTED AS PANCHAYAT TEACHER IN THE
PRIMARY SCHOOL, LALPATTI, SUKHASAN, P.S.- SINGHESHWAR,
DISTT.- MADHEPURA.
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA
3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA
4. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, KOSI DIVISION, SAHARSA
5. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOSI DIVISION,
SAHARSA
6. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, MADHEPURA
7. THE DISTRICT CO-ORDINATOR-CUM-DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF
EDUCATION, MADHEPURA
-3-
8. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHEPURA
9. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADHEPURA
10. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.-
MADHEPURA
11. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, SINGHESHWAR,
DISTT.- MADHEPURA
12. SMT. SAMA DEVI W/O SRI MANOJ KUMAR ALIAS RAGHU RAI R/O
VILL.- SUKHASAN, P.S.- SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA,
PRESENTLY WORKING AS ELECTED MUKHIYA OF GRAM PANCHAYAT,
SUKHASAN, P.S.- SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA
13. SMT. SUNITA DEVI W/O SRI DASHRATH THAKUR R/O VILL.-
SUKHASAN, P.S.- SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA, PRESENTLY
WORKING AS UP-MUKHIYA OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, SUKHASAN, P.S.-
SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA
14. SRI RAVINDRA RAM S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER THE
THEN PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT, SUKHASAN, P.S.-
SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA
15. SRI AMAR NATH BHAGAT S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER
THE THEN PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT, SUKHASAN,
P.S.- SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA
16. SRI BINAY KUMAR RAM S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITONER
PRESENTLY WORKING AS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM
PANCHAYAT, SUKHASAN, P.S.- SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA
17. SRI SANTOSH KUMAR S/O SRI GANESH KUMAR MEHTA R/O VILL.-
SUKHASAN, P.S.- SINGHESHWAR, DISTT.- MADHEPURA
18. THE DISTRICT TEACHERS EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY,
MADHEPURA.
WITH
CWJC No.10267 of 2010
1. KUMARI KIRAN D/O SRI RAM CHANDRA PRASAD BHAGAT R/O VILL
SUKHASAN, P.S.SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA, PRESENTLY
POLTED AS PANCHAYAT TEACHER IN NAV SHRIJIT PRATHMIK
VIDYALAYA , RAMTOLA SUKHASAN, P.S.SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-
MADHEPURA.
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA
3. THE DIRECTOR , PRIMARY EDUCATION GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA
4. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER KOSHI DIVISION, SAHARSA
5. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KOSHI
DIVISION, SAHARSA
6. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER MADHEPURA
7. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION MADHEPURA
8. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MADHEPURA
9. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER MADHEPURA
10. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER null SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-
MADHEPURA
11. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER
SINGHESHWAR,DISTT-MADHEPURA
-4-
12. SMT. SAMA DEVI W/O SRI MANOJ KUMAR @ RAGHU RAI R/O VILL
SUKHASAN, P.S. SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA, PRESENTLY
WORKING AS MUKHIYA OF GRAM PANCHYAT SUKHASAN
13. SMT. SUNITA DEVI W/O SRI DASHRATH THAKUR R/O VILL
SUKHASAN, P.S. SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA , PRESENTLY AS
UP-MUKHIYA OF GRAM PANCHAYAT , SUKHASAN
14. RAVINDRA RAM S/O NOT KNOWN THE THEN PANCHAYAT
SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT SUKHASAN
15. AMAR NATH BHAGAT S/O NOT KNOWN PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,
GRAM PANCHAYAT , SUKHASAN
16. BINAY KUMAR RAM S/O NOT KNOWN PRESENTLY WORKING AS
PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT , SUKHASAN
17. SANTOSH KUMAR S/O SRI GANESH KUMAR MEHTA R/O VILL
SUKHASAN, P.S. SINGHESHWAR, DISTT-MADHEPURA
18. THE DISTRICT TEACHERS EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY
MADHEPURA.
WITH
CWJC No.10268 of 2010
1. RAMDEO THAKUR S/O LATE BINDESHWARI THAKUR R/O VILL
BELOKALA, P.S.MURLIGANJ, DISTT-MADHEPURA.
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA
3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MADHEPURA
4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION MADHEPURA
5. THE MEMBER, DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT APPELLATE
AUTHORITY MADHEPURA
6. THE SUB. DIVISIONAL OFFICER MADHEPURA
7. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SINGHESHWAR, MADHEPURA
8. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER SINGHESHWAR ,
MADHEPURA
9. THE MUKHIYA GRAM PANCHAYAT SUKHSAN, SINGHESWAR,
MADHEPURA
10. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY SUKHASAN GRAM PANCHAYAT,
SINGHESHWAR, MADHEPURA
11. SRI AMARNATH BHAGAT, EX-PANCHAYAT SEVAK SUKHASAN
GRAM PANCHAYAT, SINGHESHWAR MADHEPURA, PRESENTLY
POSTED AS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, BHAWANIPUR, GRAM
PANCHAYAT, SINGHESHWAR, MADEPURA
-----------
02 16.07.2010All these writ applications have been directed against the order dated 09.06.2010 passed by the District Panchayat Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal, Madhepura in Appeal -5- No.52 of 2009. By the aforesaid order, the Tribunal upon examination of records found that the Selection Committee was not duly constituted and, as such, the entire appointment process stood vitiated. Let it be noted that the appointments were made way back in the year 2007, which came to be challenged before the Tribunal in 2009.
Learned counsels for the petitioners submit that the petitioners had nothing to do with the constitution of the committee or its validity. They had applied, given their consent and they were duly selected. A reference to the order would show that not a single irregularity in the selection process has been noticed. In the order, it is not mentioned that whether applicants were wrongly left out or any person was wrongly selected. Thus, on mere technicality petitioners' appointment could not be terminated and, that too, after almost three years of service. It is further submitted that the order cannot be sustained on the ground that notices were not issued to the petitioners. The order, being an order adversely affecting the petitioners, cannot be passed, except upon notice to the petitioners.
Having heard the parties, in my view, the impugned order cannot be sustained and must be set aside. Firstly, the order mentions that the allegation was that Up-Mukhiya unauthorizedly presided over the Selection Committee. The Up-Mukhiya does not deny that she, in fact, presided over the meetings of the Selection Committee, but in her show cause she has clearly given a ground -6- for the same. She has clearly stated that as the elder-brother-in law of the Mukhiya himself was a candidate and was figuring in the merit list, Mukhiya had decided to abstain from the selection process. In view of the Court that was the right step and in absence of Mukhiya by virtue of Section 17(2) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 it is obvious that it would be the Up- Mukhiya who would then preside over the meeting. There could be nothing wrong in that. It is then noticed in the order that the Panchayat Secretary now makes a statement that he was made to sign the deliberations on threat being given. It is only to be noted that no such stand had been taken by the Panchayat Secretary in all these years as was being for the first time taken before the Tribunal.
Be that as it may, none of these officials complained to the Tribunal that the selection process stood vitiated because they were deprived of being part of the committee. It is for the first time after three years that these stands are being taken. It is well established that any defect in the constitution of the Selection Committee would not render the actions of the committee to be bad. This is the principle of de facto/de jure control of office. In this connection reference may be made to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Gokaraju Rangaraju Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh since reported in AIR 1981 Supreme Court 1473 wherein the Apex Court has held as under:-
"The de facto doctrine is now well established that the acts of the -7- Officers de facto performed by them within the scope of their assumed official authority, in the interest of the public or third persons and not for their own benefit, are generally as valid and binding, as if they were the acts of officers de jure."
The next ground for this Court to interfere is that so far as the petitioners are concerned and even otherwise in the entire order there is no other irregularity in the selection process that has been pointed out. It is not pointed out that eligible candidates were wrongly left out and ineligible candidates were selected. It has not been noticed that undue preference was given to any person. Yet, merely because there was defect in the constitution of the Selection Committee, the entire selection process has been set aside.
In my view, that could not have been done without finding of any particular irregularity being committed in the selection process or the selection as made. None having been found out, therefore, I am constrained to hold that the impugned order cannot sustain and it is quashed accordingly. It is, however, open to the Tribunal that if proper facts being pleaded it would take appropriate action as permissible in law.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, all the writ applications are disposed of.
Trivedi (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)