Patna High Court - Orders
Urmila Devi vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 2 July, 2014
Bench: Chief Justice, Ashwani Kumar Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.490 of 2012
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 20232 of 2010
With
Interlocutory Application No. 2536 of 2012
In
Letters Patent Appeal No.490 of 2012
======================================================
Urmila Devi, Daughter of Late Ramrup Ram, Wife of Sheojagi Ram,
Resident of Village-Kurtha, P.O.-Baraila, District-Rohtas.
.... .... Respondent-Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. District Teachers Niyojan Appellate Pradhikar, Rohtas (Sasaram),
through its member.
3. The Collector, Rohtas.
4. Deputy Development Commissioner, Rohtas.
5. District Superintendent of Education, Rohtas.
6. Block Development Officer, Rohtas.
7. Block Education Extension Officer, Rohtas.
8. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Silari, Sheosagar, Rohtas.
9. Anusha Kumari, D/o Chhabinath Ram, Resident of Village & P.O.
Dhavpokhar, P.S.-Karamchat (Sadar) District-Kaimur.
.... .... Petitioners-Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Pratap Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondents-State : Mr. Manikant Mishra, GP 25
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, AC to GP 25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
And
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH
2 Patna High Court LPA No.490 of 2012 (2) dt.02-07-2014
2/3
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
2. 02-07-2014This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent has been preferred by the respondent no. 9 in C.W.J.C. No. 20232 of 2010 against the order dated 2nd February 2012 made by the learned single Judge.
The matter at issue is the appointment of the appellant as Panchayat Teacher under the Gram Panchayat Raj Silari, Sheosagar, District-Rohtas. Her appointment came to be questioned by the respondent no.9-the writ petitioner on the ground that although the writ petitioner had secured more marks, the appellant had wrongly been given benefit of weightage of 20 marks on the basis of experience certificate. The experience certificate produced by the appellant was forged and that she was wrongly appointed as Panchayat Teacher. Upon enquiry, the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Rohtas under its order dated 6th October 2010 upheld the appointment of the appellant.
On challenge to the said order dated 6th October 2010 in the above writ petition, the said order has been set aside by the learned single Judge. Learned single Judge has not believed the experience certificate produced by the appellant. Therefore, this Appeal.
Learned advocate Mr. Pratap Sharma has appeared for the appellant.
We have heard Mr. Pratap Sharma in extenso. On perusal of the records it appears that at the relevant time the appellant was less than 15 years of age and had yet not passed 3 Patna High Court LPA No.490 of 2012 (2) dt.02-07-2014 3/3 matriculate examination. The experience certificate is ex facie unbelievable.
We agree with the learned single Judge. No case for interference is made out. Appeal is dismissed in limine.
Interlocutory Application stands dismissed.
(R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Sanjeet/-
U