Patna High Court - Orders
Md.Shamim Akhtar & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 1 August, 2012
Author: Shiva Kirti Singh
Bench: Shiva Kirti Singh, Vikash Jain
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1040 of 2012
======================================================
1. KUMARI GAYATRI DEVI @ GAYATRI DEVI W/O VIJAY KUMAR
RAI R/O VILLAGE- SAMESHWAR, P.S.-BAHADURGANJ, DISTRICT-
ARARIA
2. BAKESHWAR MANJHI S/O KALANAND MANJHI R/O VILLAGE-
BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKI HAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
3. JITENDAR RAM @ ROY S/O NUNU LAL MANJHI R/O VILLAGE-
BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKI HAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
4. NEELAM KUMARI D/O SHIVANAND RAJAK R/O VILLAGE-
KAJLETA, P.S.- JOKI HAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
.... .... APPELLANT/S
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW
SECRETARIAT, PATNA
3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, DISTRICT- ARARIA
4. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ARARIA
5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, ARARIA
6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPEMNT OFFICER, JOKI HAT, ARARIA
7. THE DISTRICT TEACHERS EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, ARARIA
8. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, JOKI HAT 1,
DISTRICT- ARARIA
9. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY GRAM PANCHAYAT
ISTAMBARA, BLOCK JOKI HAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
10. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT, ISTAMBARA, BLOCK
JOKI HAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
11. MD. AKHTAR HUSSAIN S/O KAFILUDDIN R/O VILLAGE-
BAHURA, P.S.- AMOAR, DISTRICT- PURNEA
12. MD. ARSHAD AKHTAR S/O LATE MD. SHARIF R/O VILLAGE-
HAKKA, P.S.- AMOAR, DISTRICT- PURNEA
13. MD. MAHBOOB ALAM S/O LATE NASIRUDDIN R/O VILLAGE-
BARA ISTAMBRAR, P.S.- JOKI HAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
14. MD. SAWOOD ALAM S/O LATE ALIMUDDIN R/O VILLAGE-
BARA ISTAMBRAR, P.S.- JOKI HAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
15. MD. MUSHFIQUE ALAM S/O MD. SHAFIQUE ALAM R/O
VILLAGE- BARA ISTAMBRAR, P.S.- JOKI HAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
16. MD. IMRAN ALAM S/O MD. AKRAMUDDIN R/O VILLAGE-
BARA ISTAMBRAR, P.S.- JOKI HAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
17. YOGENDRA PRASAD SINGH S/O SHRI RAKAMLAL MANDAL
R/O VILLAGE- PURANDAHA, P.S.- KOCHADHAMAN, DISTRICT-
KISHANGANJ
18. SHAFQUAT ARA D/O MD. TAUHID ALAM R/O VILLAGE-
HATGAON, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA
RESPONDENT IST SET
19. RABIYA KHATOON D/O MD. SIDDAQUE R/O VILLAGE + P.O.-
Patna High Court LPA No.1040 of 2012 (2) dt.01-08-2012 2
BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOGIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
20. MD. NAUSHAD ALAM S/O MD. ASHFAQ ALAM R/O VILLAGE-
PIPARA, P.O.- BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT-
ARARIA
21. BIBI PRAVINA BAGUM D/O MD. SHOAB ALAM R/O VILLAGE +
P.O.- BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
22. BIBI SHAHIN KHATOON D/O KAMARUDDIN R/O VILLAGE +
P.O.- BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
23. BIBI FARHANA BEGUM D/O MD. MOIDURRAHMAN R/O
VILLAGE- MEHDI NAGAR, P.O.- DALMALPUR, P.S.- JOKIHAT,
DISTRICT- ARARIA
24. RENU KUMARI D/O SUPEN KUMAR MANDAL R/O VILLAGE-
GADHAMALLI, P.O.- DALMALPUR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT-
ARARIA
25. REKHA KUMARI W/O ARJI LAL MANDAL R/O VILLAGE-
RUPAILLI, P.O.- BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT-
ARARIA
26. JANKI DEVI D/O AYODHYA PRASAD SAH R/O VILLAGE + P.O.-
BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
27. BIBI DARKASHJAN D/O ABDUL RAJJAK R/O VILLAGE + P.O.-
BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
28. ASTA PRAVIN D/O MD. SHAMIM R/O VILLAGE + P.O.- BARA
ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
29. MD. SHAMIM AKHTAR S/O MD. SAFILUDDIN R/O VILLAGE +
P.O.- KESARA, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
30. MD. NAYOEMUDDIN S/O SHEKH DOMAN ALI R/O VILLAGE-
PIPRA, P.O.- BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT-
ARARIA
31. NAVIN KUMAR S/O FAKIR CHAND SAH R/O VILLAGE + P.O.-
BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
32. BIBI HENA KAUSHAR W/O ALALMGIR R/O VILLAGE- KHONA,
P.O.- BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
33. KAPUR CHAND MANDAL S/O RAM LAL MANDAL R/O
VILLAGE- RUPAILLI, P.O.- BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.- JOKIHAT,
DISTRICT- ARARIA
34. MD. NAJLMUDDIN S/O MD. IKHLAKH AHMAD R/O VILLAGE-
TARAN, P.O.- DUBBA, P.S.- JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
35. MD. NAUSHAD ALAM S/O MD. IBRAHIM R/O VILLAGE-
KUKARA, P.O.-BAGNAGAR, P.S.-JOKIHAT, DISTRICT- ARARIA
.... .... RESPONDENT/S
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No.1123 of 2012
======================================================
1. MD.SHAMIM AKHTAR SON OF MD.SAFILUDDIN, RESIDENT
OF VILLAGE + P.O. KESARA, P.S.JOKI HAT, DISTRICT ARARIA
2. BIBI FARHANA BEGUM DAUGHTER OF MD.
MOIDURRAHMAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MEHDI NAGAR,
P.O. DALMALPUR, P.S.JOKI HAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
3. MD.NAUSHAD ALAM, SON OF MD. ASHFAQ ALAM, RESIDENT
OF VILAGE PIPARA, P.O. SARA ISHTAMBARAR, P.. JOKI HAT,
Patna High Court LPA No.1040 of 2012 (2) dt.01-08-2012 3
DISTRICT ARARIA.
4. RENU KUMARI, DAUGHTER OF SUPAL KUMAR MANDAL,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE GADHAMALLI P.O. DALMALPUR, P.S.
JOKI HAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
5. NAVIN KUMAR, SON OF FAKIR CHAND SAH, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE + P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKI HAT, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
6. REKHA KUMARI, WIFE OF ARJI LAL MNDAL, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE RUPAILLI P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKIHAT,
DISTRICT ARARIA.
7. MD. NAYEEMUDDIN, SON OF DOMAN ALI, RESIDENT OF
VILAGE PIPRA P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKIHAT,
DISTRICT ARARIA.
8. KAPURCHAND MANDAL, SON OF RAMLAL MANDAL,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RUPAILLI, P.O. BARA
ISTAMBARAR,P.S.JOKI HAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
.... .... APPELLANT/S
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT.
OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT,PATNA.
2. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW
SECRETARIAT, PATNA.
3. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, DISTRICT ARAIA
4. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ARARIA, DISTRICT ARARIA
5. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
6. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, JOKIHAT, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
7. DISTRICT TEACHER EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
ARARIA.
8. BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, JOKI HAT,
DISTRICT ARARIA.
9. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT
ISTAMBARAR, BLOCK JOKI HAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
10. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT ISTAMBARAR, BLOCK
JOKIHAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
11. MD. AKHTAR HUSSAIN, SON OF KAFILUDDIN, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE BAHURA, P.S. AMAOR, DISTRICT PURNEA
12. ARSHAF AKHTAR, SON OF LATE MD. SHARIF, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE HAKKA, P.S. MAOAR, DISTRICT PURNIA..
13. MD. MAHBOOB ALAM, SON OF LATE NASIRUDDIN,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKI HAT,
DISTRICT ARARIA.
14. MD. SAWOOD ALAM, SONS OF LATE ALIMUDDIN, RESIDENT
OF VILLAGE BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKI HAT, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
15. MD. MUSHFIQUE ALAM, SON OF MD. SHAFIQUE ALAM,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKI HAT,
DISTRICT ARARIA.
16. MD. IMRAN ALAM, SON OF MD. AKRAMUDDIN, RESIDENT OF
Patna High Court LPA No.1040 of 2012 (2) dt.01-08-2012 4
VILLAGE BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKI HAT, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
17. YOGENDRA PRASAD SINGH, SON OF SRI RAKAMLAL
MANDAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PURANDAHA, P.S.
KOCHADHAMAN, DISTRICT KISHANGANJ.
18. SHAFQUAT ARA, DAUGHER OF MD.TOUHID ALAM,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HATGAON, P.S. PALASI, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
.... .... RESPONDENTS IST SET
19. JITENDRA RAM, SON OF NUNU LAL MANJHI, R/O. VILLAGE
+P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.JOGIHAT, DISTRICT ARARIA
20. BAKESHWAR MANJHI, SON OF KALA NAND MANJHI, R/O
VILLAGE +P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOGI HAT, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
21. NEELAM KUMARI, W/O. SHIVANAND RAJAK, R/O. VILLAGE
KAJLETA, P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.JOGIHAT, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
22. RABIYA KHATOON, D/O. MD.SIDDAQUE, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE + P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOGI HAT, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
23. KUMARI GAYATRI DEVI, W/O.VIJAY KR. RAI, R/O. VILL.
SAMESHWAR, P.S. BAHALAURGANJ, DISTRICT, ARARIA.
24. BIBI PRAVINE BEGUM, D/O. MD. SHOAB ALAM, R/O. VILLAGE
+ P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKIHAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
25. BIBI SHAHIN KHATOON, D/O. KAMRUDDIN, R/O. VILLAGE +
P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKIHAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
26. JANKI DEVI, D/O. AYODHYA PRASAD SAH, RESIDENT OF
VILL. + P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.JOKIHAT, DKSTRICT
ARARIA.
27. BIBI DARKASHAN, D/O. ABDUL RAJJAK, R/O. VILL. + P.O.
BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKIHAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
28. ASTA PRAVIN, D/O. MD.SHAMIM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
+P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S.JOKIHAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
29. MD. BIBI HENA KAUSHAR, W/O. ALAMGIR, R/O. VILLAGE
KHONA, P.O. BARA ISTAMBARAR, P.S. JOKIHAT, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
30. MD.NAJIMUDDIN, SON OF MD. IKHLAKH AHMAD, R/O.
VILLAGE TARAN P.O. BUBBA, P.S.JOKIHAT, DISTRICT
ARARIA.
31. MD.NAUSHAD ALAM, SON OF MD.IBRAHIM, R/O. VILL. + P.S.
KUKARA, P.O. BAGNAGAR, P.S.JOKIHAT, DISTRICT ARARIA.
RESPONDENTS IIND SET
======================================================
Appearance :
(In LPA No.1040 of 2012)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. R.P.Singh, Sr.Adv.
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manikant Mishra GP25
For Resp. Nos. 13 to 18 : Mr.Ram Sagar Singh
Mr.Mukesh Kumar Rana
Patna High Court LPA No.1040 of 2012 (2) dt.01-08-2012 5
(In LPA No.1123 of 2012)
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Y.V.Giri, Sr.Adv.
Mr.Uday Bhan Roy
For the State. : Mr. Manikant Mishra GP25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH)
2 01-08-2012Heard the parties in both the appeals.
2.On behalf of appellants the order under appeal dated 23.4.2012 has been challenged mainly on the ground that the learned Writ Court did not consider the individual defence of the appellants as to whether their appointment could be saved on account of marks obtained by them in their respective categories. A plea was also raised that the learned Single Judge has not appreciated that no document was available to show proper notice to the appellants for appearing before the Tribunal. Lastly it was submitted that Rule 18 of the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') was amended in 2008 with effect from 25.8.2008 and hence the Tribunal under the amended Rule 18 will have no jurisdiction in relation to a dispute arising out of appointment made earlier. Related to this issue there was a further submission that before the amendment in Rule 18, Block Development Officers were competent authority to decide such disputes/appeals and hence a dispute earlier decided by the Block Development Officer could not have been reconsidered and reopened by the Tribunal constituted under the amended Rule 18.
3. So far as marks and claims of individual appellants are concerned we find that the Tribunal has come to a considered opinion and finding on the basis of materials and Patna High Court LPA No.1040 of 2012 (2) dt.01-08-2012 6 documents produced before it that the appointments were vitiated on account of large scale irregularities and illegalities such as tearing away of original applications, preparation of fraudulent applications, preparation of fraudulent counseling register, merit list and select list by leaving out persons with higher marks who claim to have applied for the post and effecting appointment of persons with lesser marks. The Rules of reservation were also not followed and against the posts of teachers for general category appointments were made of persons who had qualifications of Urdu/Maulvi. From the order sheet of the Writ Court it has been shown that the Court on 5.4.2012 noticed the findings of the Tribunal and felt the necessity of looking into the relevant records relating to the selection and appointment. For this purpose the records were ordered to be produced and the Panchayat Secretary appeared with the original records as recorded in the order dated 19.4.2012. The order under appeal dated 23.4.2012 in its opening paragraph records that the parties were heard and original documents of selection and appointment were perused and then the final conclusion of the Tribunal was extracted along with a finding that the Writ Court was in complete agreement with the views recorded by the Tribunal that the appointments were vitiated by fraud, interpolation and a number of fatal infirmities.
4. In view of nature of findings given by the Tribunal and the Writ Court in our view the entire selection process must be held to be vitiated and therefore, the Writ Court has rightly held that it would not go into the question as to whether the appointment of individual petitioner could still be saved.
5. So far as issue of notice and appearance before the Tribunal is concerned, the order of the Tribunal in paragraph 2 Patna High Court LPA No.1040 of 2012 (2) dt.01-08-2012 7 categorically records that keeping in view the allegations both the parties were directed to appear with evidence and on different dates persons from both sides appeared and they included the teachers appointed/working, the category to which the appellants belong. The statement and evidence on behalf of all the persons were taken on record. Even if one or few working teachers did not appear before the Tribunal, in the facts of the case where entire selection process has been found to be vitiated, defect in notice to an individual could not be material. The Tribunal's findings are based upon the original records and materials available before it and the Writ Court has expressed full agreement with the findings of the Tribunal after going through the original records. In such circumstances we are not persuaded to go further into same issues of facts.
6. Some letters of Block Development officer and Sub-Divisional Officer are available on record to show that prior to appointment there were some allegations leading to an enquiry by Block Education Extension Officer, Jokihat. The outcome of that enquiry was communicated to the Block Development Officer, Jokihat, who in turn forwarded the matter to the Sub- divisional Officer, Araria with a request to lift the ban on appointment. It appears that appointments under challenge were made after the ban was lifted under the orders of Subdivisonal Officer, Araria. The documents and letters showing the aforesaid transaction cannot lead to a conclusion that any appeal was preferred before the Block Development Officer against the appointments in question nor there is any order of the Block Development Officer deciding such appeal or dispute. Hence on facts there is no material to support the submission that the Patna High Court LPA No.1040 of 2012 (2) dt.01-08-2012 8 Tribunal constituted under the amended Rule 18 of the Rules could not have interfered with a decision rendered by the erstwhile competent authority, the Block Development Officer, in respect of same controversy.
7. The last submission that the Tribunal cannot look into an appeal against appointments made prior to formation of the Tribunal is required to be noticed only for rejection. There is no such limitation in the Rules that no appeal can be preferred before the Tribunal for a cause of action which arose earlier. Once the Tribunal replaced the earlier appellate authority, the Block Development Officer, it will have jurisdiction to entertain appeals which were could have been entertained by the Block Development Officer.
8. In the result we find no merit in these appeals, they are accordingly dismissed.
9. We feel no difficulty in expressing the view that if any of the individual teachers affected by the impugned order has sufficient merit and eligibility he/she will have a good chance of getting reappointed on the post in question. Hence, no real prejudice will be caused to the meritorious individuals because the process of selection has to be done afresh in which all eligible persons will be entitled to apply. The fresh process must be conducted fairly under proper supervision of responsible officials authorized by the District Magistrate, Araria.
(Shiva Kirti Singh, J)
Chandran (Vikash Jain, J)