Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.347 of 2012 Krishna Kumar Son Of Sri Banshi Choudhary Resident Of Village/P.O. Kahuara, Police Station/Block Nardiganj, District Nawadah . Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The District Magistrate, Nawadah 3. The District Superintendent Of Education, Nawadah 4. The District Education Officerm Nawada 5. The Block Development Officer, Sirdalla, Police Station Sirdalla, Null District Nawadah 6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Sirdalla, Police Station Sirdalla, District Nawadah 7. The District Teachers Appointment Appellate Tribunal, Nawadah Through ItS Member 8. Teachers Selection Unit, Upardih Gram Panchayat, Police Station Sirdalla, District Nawadah Through ItS Panchayat Sachiv 9. The Incharge Head Master, Primary School, Mandal, Block/Police Station-Sirdalla, District Nawadah 10. Subodh Kumar Son Of Prem Chand Rai Resident Of Village Bharsanda, P.O. And Police Station- Sirdalla, District Nawadah . Respondents ---------------------------------- 2. 11/01/2012 The Appellate Authority by its order dated 17.10.2011 has held the appointment of the petitioner as illegal and has directed for appointment of private respondent or anyone of the category having higher marks. Appointment of the petitioner has been found illegal on the ground that experience certificate, which he had produced of working as Non-Formal Education Instructor 2 during the period 24.1.1991 to 24.12.1992 in Gram Panchayat Kahuara for getting appointment as Panchayat Teacher, was not found genuine on verification from the office of the District Education Officer, Nawada, who reported through his letter dated 1.9.2011 that the said certificate was not issued from his office. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the certificate, copy of which is Annexure-3 with the writ application, was in fact issued from the office of the District Public Education Officer, Nawada and not from the office of the District Education Officer and hence office of the District Education Officer has rightly informed that the certificate was not issued from his office. He submits that the Appellate Authority should have got the certificate verified from the office of the District Public Education Officer, Nawada. He submits that upon being validly appointed, petitioner had actually worked as Non-Formal Education Instructor and he had been paid his regular salary through the Bank, evidence of which has been annexed as 3 Annexure-2. From the order of the Appellate Authority, it appears that in fact the verification of the certificate was sought for from the office of the District Education Officer. It is not clear from the order as to whether the office of the District Education Officer and District Public Education Officer are same or separate. If the office of the District Public Education Officer is separate, then the Appellate Authority should have got the certificate verified from that office and not from the office of the District Education Officer. Further, besides getting the verification of the certificate from the office of the District Public Education Officer, the appellate authority should have also asked the petitioner to produce proof of his valid appointment as Non-Formal Education Instructor pursuant to which he claimed to have gained said experience. In the circumstances, without setting aside the order of the Appellate Authority, petitioner is given liberty to file a representation before the Appellate 4 Authority along with his appointment letter as Non-Formal Education Instructor in the concerned Panchayat, upon which the Appellate Authority shall get the certificate verified from the office of the District Public Education Officer, Nawada, if the said office is separate from the office of the District Education Officer, Nawada and thereafter will be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, if necessary, by recalling its earlier order, after due notice to the private respondent. Petitioner will also be at liberty to pray before the Appellate Authority, while filing representation along with the documents,for stay of the operation of the earlier order of the Appellate Authority. Pradeep/ ( J.
N. Singh,J.)