Patna High Court - Orders
Ramanuj Chaurasia vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 16 January, 2014
Author: Navin Sinha
Bench: Navin Sinha, Vikash Jain
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.718 of 2013
======================================================
Ramanuj Chaurasia S/O Sri Ram Sharan Mahto R/O Vill - Patailia, P.S. -
Bibhutipur, Distt - Samastipur, at present posted as Assistant Teacher, Govt.
Middle School, Sanjat, P.S. and Block - Bhagwanpur, Distt - Begusarai
.... .... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Primary and Adult Education,
Human Resources Development Department, Govt. Of Bihar, New
Secretariat, Patna -1
2. The Director Primary Education, Govt. Of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna
-1
3. The Director-Cum-Secretary (Training) Secondary Primary and Adult
Education Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
4. The Regional Deputy Director of Education Munger Division, Munger
5. The District Superintendent of Education Begusarai
6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Bhagwanpur, Block, Distt -
Begusarai
7. The Headmaster Govt. Middle School, Sanjat, P.S. - Bhagwanpur, Distt -
Begusarai
8. The National Council For Teachers Education Through The Member
Secretary, Eastern Regional Committee, Janashiksha Bhawan, Unit V.
Bhubaneshwar - 751001
9. The Regional Director Eastern Regional Committee, National Council
For Teachers Education, Janshikshya Bhawan, Unit V. Bhuwaneshwar-
751001
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Avanindra Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Neeraj Kumar, AC to SC 22
For the NCTE : Mr. S. N. Pathak, Sr. SCCG
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL ORDER
Patna High Court LPA No.718 of 2013 (4) dt.16-01-2014
2
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA)
4 16-01-2014I.A No. 4144 of 2013 has been filed to condone delay of 61 days in filing the Appeal. Having considered the submissions, the explanation for delay and its duration, we consider it proper to allow the I.A. application.
The present Appeal arises from order dated 13.02.2013 dismissing CWJC 13682 of 2009. The learned single Judge held that the appellant having obtained his training qualification from the Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow (Uttar Pradesh), the Institution was not recognized by the State of Bihar and the status of the Institution itself was under a cloud in a pending civil suit before the Civil Court at Lucknow, declining to grant relief for quashing the order dated 29.03.2005 and the prayer for grant of Matric trained pay-scale from the date of appointment i.e. 05.04.2000.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he obtained his B.Ed. degree from the Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow prior to coming into force of the NCTE Act on 17.08.1995. The appellant subsequently obtained training qualification from the Indira Gandhi Open University also. The authorities were wrongly refusing to recognize his earlier qualification obtained from the Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Patna High Court LPA No.718 of 2013 (4) dt.16-01-2014 3 Lucknow and giving him benefit of the same, causing financial loss, loss of seniority and reverting him to the untrained pay-scale also.
Counsel for the State submitted that training qualification of the appellant from the Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow was not recognized by the State Government.
Counsel for the Union of India invited our attention to (2007) 10 SCC 150 (Sunil Kumar Parimal vs. State of Bihar). The fact that the appellant obtained his training qualification from the Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow, prior to coming into force of the NCTE Act does not appear to be in dispute. Applying the ratio in Parimal (supra) at paragraph 24, we are of the view that the limited question for our consideration would be if the Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow, was recognized by the State Government of Uttar Pradesh before coming into force of the NCTE Act. Similar view taken in (2010) 13 SCC 203 State of (Uttar Pradesh v. Bhupendra Nath Tripathy) at paragraph 31, sought to be relied upon by the appellant.
No material has been placed before us on this factual aspect.
We dispose this Appeal with an observation that if the appellant files a representation before the Principal Secretary, Patna High Court LPA No.718 of 2013 (4) dt.16-01-2014 4 Education Department, Government of Bihar, and encloses material with regard to the Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow being recognized by the State of Uttar Pradesh during the period prior to coming into force of the NCTE Act, the authority shall consider the claims of the appellant in light of the law laid down in Parimal (supra) and Bhupendra Nath Tripathy(supra).We expect any such representation to be disposed as expeditiously as possible.
The Appeal stands disposed with that observation.
(Navin Sinha, J) (Vikash Jain, J) Ashwini/-