Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 789 (PAT)

Punam Choudhary v. State Of Bihar

2009-05-18

NAVIN SINHA

body2009
JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. The petitioner, who is an applicant for the post of Panchayat Teacher, is aggrieved by non-consideration of her case and rejection of her claim by the Appellate Authority, Saharsa in Appeal No. 185 of 2009. 3. The submission is that the petitioner obtained the qualification of two year Teachers Training course from Millia Kaniz Fatma Womens Primary Teachers Training College, Rambag, Purnea, which she attended during the Session 1986-88. Aggrieved by non-publication of the result that the College was not recognized, CWJC No. 9171 of 1999, was filed, which was dismissed, but in L.P.A. No. 641 of 2005 directions were issued for publication of the results for the period in which there was recognition, and which includes the period when the petitioner attended the training course. This has been followed in CWJC No. 7010 of 2006. Reliance is also placed on an order of the State Government dated 15.12.1994 at Annexure-4 making it explicit that the institution had recognition or the Session 1985-87 till the Session 1993-95. This is inclusive of the period when the petitioner attended the course in 1986-88. The Appellate Authority by a cryptic order has referred to a compact disc from the Human Resources Department classifying the institution as unrecognized. Reliance is further placed on a similar order of the Appellate Authority at Purnea in Appeal Case No. 67 of 2009 giving directions for consideration of the candidates therein for counselling for appointment inclusive of the period during which the petitioner had taken training from same institution when it had valid recognition. 4. Learned counsel submits that despite request for certified copy of the order by the Appellate Authority at Saharsa, no such copy has been made available but only the grounds aforesaid as urged and the instruction of the Human Resources Department has been made available by the Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act. This is a very serious matter. The litigant has a right to an order of a Court/statutory authority/ quasi judicial body. This is an inherent part of the principles of natural justice and of dispensation of justice enshrined in the Constitution of India. A person aggrieved has a right to assail an order by which he is aggrieved. This is a very serious matter. The litigant has a right to an order of a Court/statutory authority/ quasi judicial body. This is an inherent part of the principles of natural justice and of dispensation of justice enshrined in the Constitution of India. A person aggrieved has a right to assail an order by which he is aggrieved. Refusal to supply him a copy of the order shall be a travesty of justice and the rule of law. 5. Respondent No. 2 is directed to ensure that certified copy of the orders of the Appellate Authority are made available to any aggrieved litigant forthwith upon his applying for the same in the manner prescribed. 6. The information furnished by the Appellate Authority to the petitioner under Right to Information Act dated 16.4.2009 is not sustainable in view of the Government letter dated 15.12.1994 and the orders of this Court in L.P.A. No. 641 of 2005 and CWJC No. 7010 of 2006 (supra) as also the orders of the Appellate Authority at Purnea. The order of the Appellate Authority declining to consider his case, classifying the institution from where she studied as not recognized is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Appellate Authority, Sahasara to take a fresh decision in accordance with the decision of this Court in L.P.A. No. 641 of 2005 and the order of the Appellate Authority in Appeal No. 67 of 2009 as also of this Court in CWJC No. 7010 of 2006. 7. If the Appellate Authority proposes to pass an order adverse to the petitioner after hearing him, it is required to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law to facilitate judicial review, if need arise. 8. The Appellate Authority is also directed to make available any such copy of the order to the petitioner in the manner prescribed without any unnecessary delay. 9. On remand the Appellate Authority is directed to dispose off the matter in the manner discussed above within a maximum period of six weeks from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order before it. 10. The writ application stands disposed.