Patna High Court - Orders
Jai Prakash Baitha vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 8 September, 2015
Author: Mihir Kumar Jha
Bench: Mihir Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14180 of 2015
======================================================
Jai Prakash Baitha, son of Sri Fulchand Baitha, resident of village
Sheorajpur, P.O. Paderkha, P.S. Bhairoganj, District West Champaran
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, New
Secretariat, Patna
3. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna
4. The District Education Officer, West Champaran at Bettiah
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prashant Wibhaw, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Gp30- Raju Giri
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-09-2015Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:
"For setting aside the order under memo no. 872 dated 20.3.2013 passed and issued by District Education Officer, West Champaran, Bettiah whereby and whereunder his appointment as an Assistant Teacher in pursuance of the order passed by Apex Court in compliance of contempt case no. 257 of 2007 had been cancelled from the date of appointment itself even without contemplating a regular departmental proceeding and without providing opportunity of hearing which is a basic and elementary law and further prayer for consideration of his claim in terms of L.P.A.No. 718 of 2013 passed on 16.1.2014 in case of Ramanuj Chaurasia Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 2 vrs. State of Bihar."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that once the appointment of the petitioner was made in view of his name being included in the panel drawn under the supervision of the Apex Court followed by the direction of the Apex Court to make appointment of the persons included in the panel and that pursuant to such order of his appointment he had also joined the post of Assistant Teacher on 29.2.2012, the impugned order dated 20.3.2013 cancelling his appointment on the basis that his qualification of teachers training from Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Uttar Pradesh was wholly illegal. In this regard reliance has been placed on an order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 16.1.2014 in L.P.A.No. 718/2013 (Ramanuj Chaurasia v. the State of Bihar & ors.) and another order of the learned Single Judge dated 5.12.2014 in C.W.J.C.No. 18043/2010 (Mahendra Yadav & ors. v. the State of Bihar & ors.).
4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has submitted that both in terms of the order of the Apex Court as also in the light of the conditions imposed in the appointment letter with regard to verification of the certificate of Educational and training qualification and the appointment liable to be terminated on account of any ineligibility detected in such Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 3 qualification there can be no escape from irresistible conclusion that the petitioner‟s qualification of teachers training from Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow did not fulfil the prescribed qualification. Learned counsel for the State has also submitted that as a matter of fact not only the petitioner but around 20 more persons were also appointed on the post of teachers in the lot of 34540 post of teachers in the district of West Champaran and the services of all of them have been terminated only on the ground that their teachers training qualification acquired from Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow did not fulfil the prescribed criteria laid down under the Rules and the Advertisement.
5. The facts giving rise to this writ application is not at all in dispute. The petitioner was an applicant for the post of 34540 posts of teachers. Such post was advertised after marathon litigations before this Court and also Apex Court. The State Government through the Directorate of Primary Education, had framed Bihar Special Elementary Teacher Appointment Rule, 2010 (hereinafter to be referred to as „the 2010 Rules‟) and the object/preface of the aforesaid 2010 Rules itself would be sufficient to indicate that such Special Rules were framed by the State of Bihar only in the light of observations and directions of the Apex Court in the case of N.K. Ojha (supra) to exercise the Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 4 power of one time appointment on the post of teachers in Government Primary Schools in the State of Bihar. It has to be also kept in mind that the Rules for appointment of regular teachers in all the Primary Schools otherwise had already been repealed with effect from 1.7.2006 in terms of Rule 20(i) of Bihar Panchayat Teacher Appointment Rules-2006, which came into force with effect from 1.7.2006 and therefore 2010 Rules were framed and enforced to make appointment on 34540 posts of teachers in government primary schools with the cut off date of 23.01.2006.
6. It would be thus useful to quote the provision of 2010 Rules as was notified by the State Government vide its Notification No. 7/NI 1-61/09/730 dated 8.6.2010, which reads as follows:-
^^izLrkouk%& fcgkj jkT; esa f'k{kd fu;qfDr ls lEcfU/kr iwoZ ds fu;ekoyh] 2003 dks ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; iVuk }kjk fujLr fd;s tkus ds fo:) jkT; ljdkj }kjk ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; esa ,l0,y0ih0 la[;k&22882@04 nk;j fd;k x;k FkkA bl ,l0,y0ih0 dks jkT; ljdkj }kjk o'kZ 2006 esa ,d gyQukek nk;j dj okil ys fy;k x;k rFkk jkT; esa f'k{kd fu;kstu ds fy, ubZ fu;ekoyh] 2006 xfBr dh xbZA blds vuqlkj jkT; esa iapk;rh jkt laLFkkvksa ds ek/;e ls f'k{kd fu;kstu dh dkjZokbZ dh tk jgh gSA izfroknhx.k us jkT; ljdkj }kjk gyQukesa esa fn;s x;s dfri; rF;ksa dk vuqikyu ugha fd;s tkus ds nkos ds lEcU/k esa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; esa ,d voekuukokn la[;k&297@2007 nk;j fd;kA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us fnukad&09-12-2009 dks ,d vkns'k ikfjr djrs gq, fnlEcj 2003 esa izdkf'kr foKkiu esa vafdr 34]540 lgk;d f'k{kd ds inksa ij dsoy izf"kf{kr mEehnokjksa dh fu;qfDr gsrq ^^,d ckj fu;qfDr^^ (One Time Appointment) djus dk funsZ'k jkT; ljdkj dks fn;kA rnuq:i fcgkj ds jkT;iky }kjk fcgkj fo"ks'k izkjafHkd f"k{kd fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh] 2010 dh Lohd`fr iznku dh xbZA bl fu;ekoyh ds dfri; fcUnqvksa ds laca/k esa iqu% ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk vius vkns"k fnukad 12-5-2010 ds }kjk funs"k fuxZr fd;k x;k gSA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds ]kjk ikfjr vkns"k ds leqfpr fdz;kUo;u gsrq fu;ekoyh esa la"kks/ku dh vko";drk gSA vr,o] Hkkjr ds lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn&309 ds ijUrqd }kjk iznÙk "kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, fcgkj jkT;iky ekuuh; loksZPp u;k;ky; }kjk fnukad 9-12-2009 ,oa fnukad 12-5-2010 dks ikfjr vkns"k ds dk;kZUo;u gsrq jkT;Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 5
ds izkjafHkd fo|ky;ksa esa f"k{kdksa dh ,d ckj fu;qfDr (One Time Appointment) gsrq fuEufyf[kr fo"ks'k fu;ekoyh cukrs gS%& 1- laf{kIr uke] foLrkj ,oa izkjaHk-& (i) ;g fu;ekoyh ^^fcgkj fo"ks'k izkjafHkd f"k{kd fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh^^] 2010 dgh tk ldsxhA (ii) bldk izlkj laiw.kZ fcgkj jkT; esa gksxk rFkk ;g dsoy ,d ckj fu;qfDr (One Time Appointment) ds fy, ekU; gksxh A (iii) ;g vf/klwpuk ds fuxZr dh frfFk ls izHkkoh ekuh tk;sxh rFkk 23 tuojh 2006 rd izf"k{k.k izkIr vH;fFkZ;ksa ds lEcU/k esa ,d ckj fu;qfDr (One Time Appointment) dh dkjZokbZ ds i"pkr~ Lor% lekIr gks tk;sxhA 2- ifjHkk'kk,¡-&
(i) ^^foHkkx^^ ls vfHkizsr gS ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkx]
(ii) ^^ftyk laoxZ^^ ds f"k{kd ls vfHkizsr gS ftyk esa iwoZ ls jkT;
ljdkj }kjk fu/kkZfjr osrueku ,oa lsok"krksZ ds v/khu fu;qfDr izkjafHkd f"k{kdA
(iii) ^^izkjafHkd fo|ky;^^ ls vfHkizsr gS ,sls fo|ky; ftlesa oxZ& 1 ls oxZ& V vFkok oxZ& 1 ls oxZ& VII rd dh i<kbZ gksrh gks]
(iv) ^^izf"k{k.k^^ ls vfHkizsr gS dsUnz ;k fdlh jkT; ljdkj }kjk ekU;rk izkIr laLFkku vFkok jk'Vªh; v/;kid f"k{kk ifj'kn~ ¼,u-lh-Vh-bZ-½ }kjk ekU;rk izkIr laLFkku ls nks o'khZ; izf"k{k.k dk fMIyksek ;k lfVZfQdsV vFkok ch-,y-,M- vFkok ch-,M- dh fMxzhA "kkjhfjd f"k{kd ds fy, U;wure nks o'kksZ dk lfVZfQdsV ¼lh-ih-,M@fcgkj ljdkj }kjk eku;rk izkIr izf"k{k.k laLFkku ls ,d o'khZ; lfVZfQdsV ¼lh-ih-,M-@Mh-ih-,M-½A 3- fu;qfDr gsrq ;ksX;rk-& (i) Hkkjr dk ukxfjd gks rFkk fcgkj jkT; dk fuoklh gksA
(ii) dsUnz ;k fdlh jkT; ljdkj }kjk eku;rk izkIr fo|ky; @egkfo|ky; ls bUVjehfM,V ijh{kk ¼mifu;e V dks NksM+½ mÙkh.kZ gks A blds v/khu fdlh laLFkku }kjk iznÙk rduhdh fMxzh ;k Hkk'kk fo"ks'k dh fMxzh@mikf/k ftldh lerqY;rk dh ekU;rk fcgkj ljdkj dkfeZd ,oa iz"kklfud lq/kkj foHkkx vFkok ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkx }kjk f"k{kd in ij fu;qfDr gsrq ugha nh xbZ gS] lfEefyr ugha gSA
(iii) o'kZ 1995 ds iwoZ dsUnz vFkok fdlh jkT; ds }kjk ekU;rk izkIr laLFkku ls nks o'khZ; izf"k{k.k ijh{kk vFkok ch-,M- dh ijh{kk mÙkh.kZ gksA o'kZ 1995 ds ckn ,u-lh-Vh-bZ- }kjk ekU;rk izkIr laLFkku ls nks o'khZ; f"k{kd izf"k{k.k fMIyksek ;k ch-,M- vFkok ch-,y-,M- dh ijh{kk mÙkh.kZ gksA
(iv) mnwZ f"k{kd ds inksa ds fy, fcgkj enjlk f"k{kk cksMZ ls ekSyoh ¼bUVjehfM,V Lrj½ rFkk lerqY; ijh{kk ikl vFkok bUVjehfM,V ijh{kk esa 200 vadksa ds mnwZ] fo'k; dh ijh{kk ds lkFk nks o'khZ; izf"k{k.k ijh{kk mÙkh.kZ gksA
(v) "kkjhfjd f"k{kd ds inksa ds fy, bUVjehfM,V mRrh.kZ rFkk lh-ih-,M-@Mh-ih- ,M- dh fMxzh gksA (vi) ,sls vH;FkhZ] tks fcgkj jkT; ds fuoklh gSa rFkk o'kZ 1995 ds iwoZ fcgkj jkT; ¼vfoHkkftr½ ds fdlh izf"k{k.k egkfo|ky; ls nks o'khZ; izf"k{k.k mÙkh.kZ gS vFkok lh-ih-,M- mÙkh.kZ gS fdUrq bUVjehfM,V ugha gS] os Hkh fu;qfDr ds fy, vkosnu ns ldsaxsA fdUrq fu;qfDr ds 4 o'kksZ ds vUnj mUgsa bUVjehfM,V dh ;ksX;rk gkfly dj ysuk vfuok;Z gksxkA 4- fnukad 23 tuojh 2006 rd izf"k{k.k ijh{kk mÙkh.kZ mEehnokj gh vkosnu ns ldsaxsA 5- vk;q& fnukad 23 tuojh] 2006 dks vH;FkhZ dh U;wure vk;q 18 o'kZ rFkk fnukad 31-1-2011 dks vf/kdre mez 60 o'kZ ls vf/kd ugha gksxhA 6- inksa ij fu;qfDr-&foKkfir gksusokys dqy 34]540 inksa ij fu;qfDr dh dkjZokbZ dh tk;sxhA buesa 12]862 in mnwZ fo'k; ds rFkk "ks'k 21678 in lkekU; fo'k; ds gksaxsA lkekU; inksa ¼mnwZ inksa dks NksM+dj½ ds dqy 5% inksa ij "kkjhfjd f"k{kdksa dh fu;qfDr dh tk;sxhA vkjf{kr dksfV vFkok mnwZ fo'k; esa vgZrk izkIr vH;FkhZ miyC/k ugha gksus ij fjDr inksa dh ojh;rkuqlkj vukjf{kr dksfV ,oa lkekU; fo'k; ds mEehnokjksa ls Hkjk tk;sxkA 7- vkj{k.k-& jkT; ljdkj ds vkj{k.k fu;e ds vuqlkj f"k{kdksa dh fu;qfDr dh tk;sxhA fodykax mEehnokjksa dks fu;ekuqlkj 3% lekukUrj vkj{k.k ns; gksxkA 8- vkosnu izkfIr dh izfØ;k-& (i) fcgkj deZpkjh p;u vk;ksx }kjk fu/kkZfjr vkosnu izi= esa dsoy izf"kf{kr mEehnokj ls gh vkosnu izkIr fd;s tk;saxs A Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 6
(ii) vkosnu ds lkFk "kS{kf.kd ,oa iz"kS{kf.kd izek.k i=ksa dh vfHkizekf.kr izfr yh tk;sxh tks laLFkku ds izeq[k vFkok jktif=r inkf/kdkkjh ds }kjk vfHkizekf.kr gksxhA
(iii) vkj{k.k dksfV esa fu;qfDr gsrq nkok djus okys mEehnokjksa ls tkfr izek.k i= fy;s tk;saxsA vuqlwfpr tkfr@ vuqlwfpr tutkfr ds nkok djus okys dks vuqeaMy inkf/kdkjh ,oa fiNM+k ,oa vR;Ur fiNM+k tkfr esa nkok djus okys dks ftyk inkf/kdkjh vFkok muds }kjk vf/kd`r inkf/kdkjh ds }kjk dzhfeys;j esa "kkfey ugh gksus dk izek.k&i= nsuk gksxkA ,slk ugha djus ij vkj{k.k dk nkok ekU; ugh gksxkA tks mEehnokj tkfr izek.k i= ugha nsaxs vFkok vkjf{kr dksfV esa nkok ugha djsaxs mUgsa lkekU; dksfV dk vH;FkhZ ekudj fu;qfDr dh tk;sxhA fodykax mEehnokjksa dks l{ke izkf/kdkj ds }kjk iznÙk fodykaxrk izek.k i= nsuk gksxkA 9- ojh;rk lwph dk fuekZ.k-& izf"k{k.k l= ,oa izf"k{k.k esa izkIr vad dks vk/kkj ekudj dksfVokj vH;fFkZ;ksa dh ojh;rk lwph rS;kj dh tk;sxhA izf"k{k.k l= ,oa vad leku gksus ij mez dks vk/kkj ekuk tk;sxkA rS;kj lwph ¼l=okj nks o'khZ; izf"k{k.k izkIr mEehnokj ds uke ds i"pkr ch-,M- mEehnokj ds uke rFkk mlds i"pkr~ "kkjhfjd f"k{kd mEehnokj lh-ih-,M- ds ckn Mh-ih-,M- ds uke ds lkFk ½ ls ftykokj ,oa dksfVokj fjfDr ds vuqlkj dkmaflfyax ds vk/kkj ij mEehnokjksa ds uke ftyksa dks Hkst fn;s tk;sx a sA 10- fu;qfDr i=-& lHkh ftyk f"k{kk v/kh{kdksa }kjk izkIr mEehnokjksa dh lwph dh laiqf'V ^^fcgkj deZpkjh p;u vk;ksx^^ ls djkdj vH;FkhZ dks fu;qfDr i= fuxZr fd;s tk;sx a sA fu;qfDr ds i"pkr~ muds "kS{kf.kd ,oa iz"kS{kf.kd izek.k i=ksa dh tk¡p djk yh tk;sxhA tk¡p gksus rd mudh fu;qfDr vkSicaf/kd gksxh rFkk osrukfn dk Hkqxrku Hkh vkSicaf/kd gksxkA izek.k&i= xyr ik;s tkus ij mudh fu;qfDr jÌ dj Hkqxrku dh xbZ jkf"k dh ,deq"r olwyh dh tk;sxh rFkk dkuwuh dkjZokbZ Hkh dh tk;sxhA 11- laoxZ-& bl fu;ekoyh ds v/khu fu;qDr f"k{kdksa dk ftyk laoxZ gksxkA 12- lsok "kÙkZ-& bl fu;ekoyh ds v/khu fu;qDr f"k{kdksa dk osrueku ,oa lkekU; lsok "kÙksZ ogha gksxh tks iwoZ ds ftyk laoxZ ds fu;qDr f"k{kd ds gSAa fdUrq isa'kukfn gsrq ;s f"k{kd jkT; ljdkj ds va"knk;h isa"ku ;kstuk ls vkPNkfnr gksaxsA 13- inksa dh lekfIr-& bl fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh ds vuqlkj Hkjs tkus okys in Hkfo'; esa fjDr gksus ij Lor% lekIr gks tk;sx a sA 14- vihy-& ftyk }kjk fu;qfDr i= nsus vFkok inLFkkiu ds laca/k esa dksbZ Hkh vihy lEcfU/kr ftyk ds ftyk inkf/kdkjh ds }kjk fu'ikfnr fd;k tk;sxk] ftudk fu.kZ; vafre gksxkA 15- dfBukbZ dks nwj djus dh "kfDr-& bl fu;ekoyh ds fdlh izko/kku dh O;k[;k djus ;k mls ykxw djus esa gksusokyh dfBukbZ;ksa dks nwj djus dh "kfDr ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkx esa fufgr gksaxhA 16- fujlu ,oa O;ko`fÙk-& ;g fu;ekoyh ^^fo"ks'k f"k{kd fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh^^ gSA blfy, iwoZ ds fu;kstu fu;ekoyh] 2006 ¼le;≤ ij ;Fkk la"kksf/kr½ dk izHkko bl fu;ekoyh ij ugha iM+sxkA ** (underlining for emphasis)
7. As noted above, the State Government had made Bihar Staff Selection Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as „the Commission‟), the nodal agency to prepare the panel for appointment of such teachers and for this purpose, by a separate Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 7 letter No. 7/NI 1-61/09 MA 731 dated 8.6.2010, had sent a requisition giving the breakup of 34540 posts for all the 38 districts. This letter of the State Government dated 8.6.2010 being the requisition for filling up 34540 posts is also reproduced herein below:-
^^fcgkj ljdkj] ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkx i= la[;k&7@fu0&1&61@09 ek0 731] fnukad 8-6-2010A lsok es]a v/;{k@lfpo] fcgkj jkT; deZpkjh p;u vk;ksx] iVukA fo"k;& jkT; ds izkjafHkd fo|ky;ksa esa dqy 34540 lgk;d f'k{kdksa dh fu;aqfDr gsrwq fu;ekuqlkj ojh;rk lwph rS;kj dj dkmfUlfyax ds vk/kkj ij vH;FkhZ dk uke ftyksa dks miyC/k djkus gsrq vf/k;kpukA mi;qZDr fo"k; ds laca/k esa dguk gS fd ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds vkns'k ds vuqikyu esa fcgkj jkT; ds izkjafHkd fo|ky;ksa esa dqy 34540 f'k{kdksa dh fu;qfDRk fnukad 31-8-2010 rd iwjh dj yh tkuh gSA f'k{kdksa dh fu;qfDr gsrq eaf=ifj"kn~ }kjk ^^fcgkj fo'ks"k izkjafHkd f'k{kd fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh** 2010] vf/klwfpr dh x;h gSA vf/klwfpr fu;ekoyh ds izko/kkuksa ds vUrxZr fcgkj deZpkjh p;u vk;ksx }kjk fufeZr ojh;rk lwph ,oa dkmfUlfyax ds vk/kkj ij ftykokj Hksts tkus okyh lwph ds vk/kkj ij ftyksa esa f'k{kd dh fu;qfDr dh tkuh gSA vr,o f'k{kdksa dh fu;qfDr ls lacaf/kr ^^fcgkj fo'ks"k izkjafHkd f'k{kd fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh] 2010** rFkk jkT; Lrj ij dksfVokj lesfdr fjfDr dh lwph dh izfr layXu djrs gq, vuqjks/k gS fd izklafxd fu;ekoyh ds izko/kkuksa ds vuqlkj dqy 34540 lgk;d f'k{kdksa dh fu;qfDr gsrq le; ij ojh;rk lwph dk fuekZ.k djrs gq, dkmfUlfyax ds vk/kkj ij ftykokj lwph lacaf/kr ftyk ds ftyk f'k{kk v/kh{kd dks ;Fkk'kh?kz miyC/k djkus dh d`ik dh tk; rkfd ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds vkns'k ds vuqikyu esa ftyksa ds }kjk fnukad 31-8-2010 ds iwoZ f'k{kdksa dh fu;qfDr dh tk ldsAa fu;qfDr gsrq jkT; Lrj ij dksfVokj fjfDr dh la[;k fcgkj ljdkj ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkxA fcgkj fo'ks"k izkjafHkd f'k{kd fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh] 2010 ds vuqlkj dqy 34540 inksa ij fu;qfDr gsrq ftykokj inksa dk fooj.kA dz- la- ftyk dk uke lkekU; in mnZw in lgk0 f'k{kd ;ksx dk in 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 iVuk 10710 574 56 1700 2 ukyUnk 872 391 46 1309 3 Hkkstiqj 537 449 28 1014 4 jksgrkl 924 489 48 1461 5 cDlj 326 154 17 497 6 dSejw 599 212 31 842 7 x;k 864 347 46 1257 8 uoknk 410 182 22 614 9 vkSjxa kckn 484 221 26 731 10 tgkukckn 424 188 22 634 11 vjoy 291 106 15 412 12 eaqxsj 498 152 26 676 13 csxwljk; 578 204 30 812 14 tewbZ 568 141 30 739 15 'ks[kiqjk 104 294 6 404 16 y[khljk; 220 86 12 318 17 [kxfM+;k 384 151 20 555 18 Hkkxyiqj 837 314 44 1195 Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 8 19 ckadk 578 167 30 775 20 lgjlk 506 240 27 773 21 lwikSy 389 292 21 702 22 e/ksiqjk 284 155 15 454 23 iwf.kZ;ka 513 561 27 1101 24 fd'kuxat 299 441 15 755 25 vjfj;k 333 681 18 1032 26 dfVgkj 400 204 21 625 27 lkj.k 836 332 44 1212 28 xksikyxat 648 916 34 1598 29 floku 778 477 41 1296 30 njHkaxk 690 375 36 1101 31 e/kqcuh 458 264 24 746 32 leLrhiqj 548 512 29 1089 33 eqtIQjiqj 790 699 42 1531 34 oS'kkyh 248 147 13 408 35 flrke<+h 641 512 34 1187 36 f'kogj 181 179 10 370 37 iwohZ pEikj.k 818 717 43 1578 38 if'peh pEikj.k 666 336 35 1037 20594 12862 1084 34540
8. The Commission, thereafter, had issued its advertisement being Advertisement No. 210/10 wherein the last date for filling up of the application was 19.7.2010 and the same is also reproduced herein below:-
fcgkj deZpkjh p;u vk;ksx iks-&osVujh dkWyst] iVuk&14 jkT; ds izkjafHkd fo|ky;ksa esa lgk;d f'k{kd in ij fu;qfDr gsrq foKkiu foKkiu la[;k& 210@2010 ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds vkns'k ds vuqikyu esa ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkx] fcgkj ds varxZr fcgkj jkT; ds izkjafHkd fo|ky;ksa esa dqy 34540 lgk;d f'k{kdksa ¼osrueku PB-2 ,oa xzsM is&4200½ dh fu;qfDr gsrq jkT; ljdkj }kjk xfBr ^^fcgkj fo'ks"k izkjafHkd f'k{kd fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh 2010** ds vkyksd esa fnukad 23- 01-2006 rd ds izf'kf{kr mEehnokjksa ls vkosnu i= ¼fofgr izi= es½a vkeaf=r fd;s tkrs gSA 2- fjfDr;ksa dk dksfVokj C;ksjk fuEuor gS%& lkekU; fo"k; mnwZ 'kkjhfjd f'k{kk ;ksx 1 lkekU; 10297 6431 542 17270 2 vuqlfw pr 3295 2058 173 5526 tkfr 3 vuqlfw pr 206 129 11 346 tutkfr 4 vR;ar 3707 2315 195 6217 fiNM+k oxZ 5 fiNM+k oxZ 2471 1543 130 4144 6 fiNM+k oxZ 618 386 33 1037 dh efgyk dqy ;ksx 20594 12862 1084 34540 inkaas dh la[;k vkSicaf/kd gSA 3- fjDr inksas ij fu;qfDr& foKkfir dqy 34540 inksa ij fu;qfDr dh dkjZokbZ dh tk;sxhA vkjf{kr dksfV vFkok mnwZ fo"k; esa vgZrk izkIr vH;FkhZ miyC/k ugha gksus ij fjDr inksa dh ojh;rkuqlkj vukjf{kr dksfV ,oa lkekU; fo"k; ds mEehnokjksa ls Hkjk tk;sxkA 4- ojh;rk lwph dk fuekZ.k& izf'k{k.k l= ,oa izf'k{k.k esa izkIr vad dkks vk/kkj Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 9 ekudj dksfVokj vH;fFkZ;ksa dh ojh;rk lwph rS;kj dh tk;sxhA izf'k{k.k l= ,oa vad leku gksus ij mez dks vk/kkj ekuk tk;sxkA rS;kj lwph ¼l=okj nks o"khZ;
izf'k{k.k izkIr mEehnokj ds uke ds i'pkr ch-,M- mEehnokj ds uke rFkk mlds i'pkr 'kkjhfjd f'k{kd mEehnokj lh-ih-,M- ds ckn Mh-ih-,M- ds uke ds lkFk½ ls ftykokj ,oa dksfVokj fjfDr ds vuqlkj dkmfUlfyax ds vk/kkj ij mEehnokjksa ds uke dh vuq'kalk foHkkx dks Hkst fn;s tk;saxsA 5- 'kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk& bl in ds fy, fuEukafdr 'kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk vfuok;Z gksxkA ¼i½ dsUnz ;k fdlh jkT; ljdkj }kjk ekU;rk izkIr fo|ky;@egkfo|ky; ls baVjehfM,V ijh{kk ¼mi dafMdk v dks NksM+½ mRrhZ.k gksA blds v/khu fdlh laLFkku }kjk iznRr rduhdh fMxzh ;k Hkk"kk fo'ks"k dh fMxzh@mikf/k ftldh lerqY;rk dh eku;rk fcgkj ljdkj ds lkekU; iz'kklu foHkx ¼iwoZ dkfeZd ,oa iz'kklfud lq/kkj foHkkx½ vFkok ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkx] fcgkj }kjk f'k{kd in ij fu;qfDr@fu;kstu gsrq ugha nh x;h gS] lfEefyr ugha gSA ¼ii½ o"kZ 1995 ds iwoZ dsUnz vFkok fdlh jkT; ds }kjk ekU;rk izkIr laLFkku ls nks o"khZ; izf'k{k.k ijh{kk vFkok ch-,M- dh ijh{kk mRrh.kZ gksA o"kZ 1995 ds ckn ,u- lh-Vh-bZ- ds }kjk ekU;rk izkIr laLFkku ls nks o"khZ; f'k{kd izf'k{k.k fMIyksek ;k ch- ,M- vFkok ch-,y-,M- dh ijh{kk mRrh.kZ gksA ¼iii½ mnwZ f'k{kd ds inks ads fy, fcgkj enjlk f'k{kk cksMZ ls ekSyoh ¼baVjehfM,V Lrj½ rFkk lerqY; ijh{kk ikl vFkok baVjehfM,V ijh{kk esa 200 vadksa ds mnwZ fo"k; dh ijh{kk ds lkFk nks o"khZ; izf'k{k.k ijh{kk mRrhZ.k gksA ¼iv½ 'kkjhfjd f'k{kd ds inks ads fy, baVjehfM,V mRrhZ.k rFkk lh-ih-,M-@Mh-ih- ,M- dh fMxzh gksA ¼v½ ,sls vH;FkhZ] tks fcgkj jkT; ds fuoklh gSa rFk o"kZ 1995 ls iwoZ fcgkj jkT; ¼vfoHkkftr½ ds fdlh ekU;rk izkIr izf'k{k.k egkfo|ky; ls nks o"khZ; izf'k{k.k mRrhZ.k gS vFkok lh-ih-,M-@Mh-ih-,M- mRrhZ.k gS]a fdUrq baVjehfM,V ugha gS os Hkh fu;qfDr ds fy, vkosnu ns ldsaxsA fdUrq fu;qfDr ds 4 o"kkSZ dsa vanj mUgsa baVjehfM,V dh ;ksX;rk gkfly dj ysuk vfuok;Z gksxkA 6- vU; ik=rk& ¼i½ Hkkjr ds ukxfjd gks rFk fcgkj jkT; ds fuoklh gksA ¼ii½ fnukad 23-01-2006 rd izf'k{k.k ijh{kk mRrhZ.k gksA 7- vk;q& fnukad 23-01-2006 dks vH;FkhZ dks U;wure vk;q 18 o"kZ rFkk 31-01-2011 dks vf/kdre mez 60 o"kZ ls vf/kd ugha gksuh pkfg,A 8- vkj{k.k& ¼i½ jkT; ljdkj ds vkj{k.k fu;e ds vuqlkj f'k{kdksa dh fu;qfDr dh tk;sxhA ¼ii½ vkj{k.k dksfV esas fu;qfDr gsrq nkok djus okys mEehnokjksa ls tkfr izek.k i= ds fy, tk;saxsA vuqlwfpr tkfr@vuqlwfpr tutkfr ds nkok djus okys dks vuqeaMy inkf/kdkjh ,oa fiNM+k oxZ ,oa vR;Ur fiNM+k oxZ esa nkok djus okys dks ftyk inkf/kdkjh vFkok muds }kjk vf/kd`r inkf/kdkjh ds }kjk dzhehys;j esa 'kkfey ugha gksu dk izek.k i= nsuk gksxkA ,slk ugha djus ij vkj{k.k dk nkok ekU; ugha gksxkA tks mEehnokj tkfr izek.k i= ugha nsaxs vFkok vkj{k.k dksfV esa nkok ugah djsaxs mUgsa lkekU; dksfV dk vH;FkhZ ekudj fu;qfDr dh tk;sxhA ¼iii½ fodykax mEehnokjksa dks fu;ekuqlkj 3% lkekukUrj vkj{k.k ns; gksxkA fodykax mEehnokjksa dks l{ke izkf/kdkj ds }kjk iznRr fodykaxrk izek.k i= nsuk gksxkA ¼iv½ fofgr vkj{k.k izek.k i= izLrqr djus ds fy, mEehnokjk ds vkosnu dh frfFk vafre frfFk gksxh] mDr frfFk ds i'pkr~ izLrqr fd;k x;k tkfr izek.k i= vekU; gksxkA] vkSj lacaf/kr mEEkhnokj lkekU; dksfV esa vafdr fd;s tk;saxsA 9- laoxZ ,oa lsok 'krZ& fcgkj fo'ks"k izkjafHkd f'k{kd fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh 2010 d v/khu fu;qfDr f'k{kdksa dk ftyk laoxZ gksxk ,oa budk osrueku rFkk lkekU; lsok 'krZsZ ogh gksxh tks iwoZ ds ftyk laoxZ ds fu;qfDr f'k{kd ds gSA fdUrq isa'kukfn gsrq ;s f'k{kd jkT; ljdkj ds va'knk;h isa'ku ;kstuk ls vkPNkfnr gksaxsA vkosnu i= Hkjus gsrq vko';d funasZ'k 10- izfof"V& Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 10 ¼i½ vkosnu fu/kkZfjr izi= esa ,&4 vkdkj ¼210x297 fe- eh-½ ds eksVs dkxt ij vk;ksx dh csclkbZV http:/bssc.bih.nic.in ls MkmuyksM fd;k tk ldrk gSa vkosnu izi= nks i`"Bksa esa gh gksuh pkfg,A fu/kkZfjr izi= ls vyx] Vafdr] gLrfyf[kr vkosnu Lohdkj ugh fd;s tk;ssxAs bl foKkiu ls layXu vkosnu i= dh Nk;kizfr mijksDr funsf'kr vkdkj ds dkxt ij dj mls O;ogkj esa vki ys ldrs gSA ¼ii½ vkosnu i= dh lHkh izfof"V;ka uhys@dkys ckWy IokbaV isu ls LogLrfyfi esa lkQ&lkQ vafdr djsaA pwfa d vkosnu dEI;wVjhdr iz.kkyh }kjk izkslsls fd;k tkuk gS] vr% ;g vfuok;Z gS fd vkosnu fu/kkZfjr izi= esa gh gks] mfpr ,oa iw.kZ :Ik ls Hkjk gks vkSj blesa dksbZ la'kks/ku@ifjorZu@vksojjkbfVax ugha gksA vkosnu Hkjus gsrq vaxzsth ds varjk"Vzh; vadksa dks gh iz;ksx djsaA ¼iii½ tks LrEHk ¼dkWye½ mEehnokj ls lacaf/kr u gks vFkok ml ij ykxw u gks] mls (x) dj nsaA ¼iv½ mEehnokj viuh 'kkjhfjd igpku dk ,d fof'k"V fpUg vo'; vafdr djsa tks nwljksa ls mudh igpku i`Fkd dj ldsA 11- QksVksxzkQ& vkosnu i= ds fu/kkZfjr LFkku ij QksVks fpidkus gsrq NksM+h x;h [kkyh txg esa vafdr funsZ'kksa dk v{kj'k% ikyu djsaA QksVks LVsiy u djsa ;k lsyksVsi ls u lkVsaA xksan ls vPNh rjg fpidk,aA mEehnokj dk QksVks gky ds fuxsfVo ls cus gksus pkfg,A vLi"V QksVks vkosnu vLohd`r dk dj.k gks ldrk gSA 12- vkosnu i= dk izs"k.k& ¼i½ vkosnu i= ds lkFk lHkh 'ks{kf.kd ;ksX;rk laca/kh izek.k i=kas dh Lo- vfHkizekf.kr Nk;kizfr] tUefrfFk ds lR;kiu ds fy, eSfVzd ;k lh-ch-,l-bZ- ;k vkbZ-lh-,l-lh- ;k vU; jkT; ds cksMZ dk izek.k i=@fiNM+k@vR;ar fiNM=k oxZ ds mEehnokjksa ds fy, ftyk inkf/kdkjh vFkok muds }kjk izkf/kd`r inkf/kdkjh }kjk fuxZr dzhehys;j esa u gksus dk tkfr izek.k i= dh LovfHkizekf.kr Nk;kizfr ,oa vuqlwfpr tkfr@tutkfr ds mEEhnokjksa ds fy, vuqeaMy inkf/kdkjh }kjk fuxZr tkfr izek.k i= dh LovfHkizefk.kr Nk;kizfr] ¼vkosnu i= ds lkFk LVsiy u djsa½ fyQkQs esa Hkjdj vo'; layXu djrs gq, fucaf/kr Mkd@LihM iksLV ls fu/kkZfjr frfFk rd fuEu irs ij Hksts& ^^lfpo fcgkj deZpkjh p;u vk;ksx] iksLV Lohdkj fd;s tk;saxsA gkFkksa&gkFk vFkok vU; fdlh ek/;e ls Hksts x;s vkosnu i= Lohdkj ugha fd;s tk;saxsA ¼ii½ vkosnu Hksts tkus okys fyQkQs ij foKkiu la[;k rFkk ftl f'k{kd ds in ¼lkekU; mnwZ@mnwZin@'kkjhfjd f'k{kd ds in½ ds fy, vkosnu fn;k tk jgk gS] mls vo'; vafdr djsaA ¼iii½ vkosnu i= ds lkFk 22x24 ls- eh- dk ¼vH;FkhZ ds irk ds lkFk½ ,d fyQkQk lay a Xu fd;k tk;sxk] ftl ij 25 ¼iphl½ :I;s dk fucaf/kr iksLV gsrq Mkd fVdV fpidk gksA 13- vU; vko';d funsZ'k& ¼i½ vkosnu i= ij gLrk{kj dks NksM+dj vaxzsth ds cM+s v{kjks esa gh vkosnu i= Hkjk gksuk pkfg,A vkosnd vkosnu i= ds fu/kkZfjr LFkkuks ij viuk iw.kZ gLrk{kj djsaxsA vkosnu i= ds fu/kkZfjr LFkkuks ij vkosnd ds gLrk{kj ugha jgus ij vkosnu i= jn~n dj fn;k tk;sxkA ¼ii½ vkosnd vius uke dh oRrZuh (Spelling) ogh fy[ksaxs tks eSfVzd ds lfVZfQdsV@vad&i= esa vafdr gSA ¼iii½ tUe frfFk& vkosnd ds eSfVzd lfVZfQdsV@vad i= esa tks mudh tUefrfFk ;Fkk frfFk] eghuk vkSj o"kZ vafdr gS ogh vkosnu i= ds ;Fkk fu/kkZfjr LFkku ij fy[ksaA ¼iv½ vkosnd vkosnu i= esa viuk uke] firk dk ;k ifr dk uke] i=kpkj dk laiw.kZ ,oa Li"V irk Hkjsaxs rFkk viuk gLrk{kj fu/kkZfjr LFkku ij djsaxsA vkosnu i= esa fdlh izdkj dk iquysZ[ku (Overwriting)] dkV dwV (Cutting)] foys[ku (Erasing) gksus ij vkosnu i= jn~n dj fn;k tk;sxkA ¼v½ vH;FkhZ viuh gLrfyfi esa gh viuk vkosnu iw.kZ :i ls HkjsaA 14- vafre frfFk& Hkjk gqvk vkosnu o= dsoy fucaaf/kr Mkd@LihM iksLV ls bl Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 11 izdkj Hkstsa rkfd fnukad 19-07-2010 dks la/;k 6-00 cts rd lfpo] fcgkj deZpkjh p;u vk;ksx] iks-&osVujh dkWyst] iVuk&800014 dks vo'; izkIr gks tk;sA vU; fdlh Hkh ek/;e ls Hkssts x;s vkosnu i= Lohdkj ugha fd;s tk;saxsA fu/kkZfjr vafre frfFk ds ckn izkIr gksus okys vkosnu vLohd`r dj fn;k tk;sxk vkSj blds fy, vk;ksx drbZ ftEesokj ugha gksxkA 15- vU;kU;& ¼i½ viw.kZ vgLrk{kfjr rFkk foyac ls izkIr vkosnu i= vLohd`r dj fn;k tk;sxkA ¼ii½ fdlh izdkj dh iSjoh djus ;k djkus vFkok xyr ;k viw.kZ lwpuk nsus ij vH;fFkZRo jn~n dj fn;k tk;sxk] ftlds fy, vk;ksx ftEesokj ugha gksxkA lfpo fcgkj deZpkjh p;u vk;ksx] iVuk
9. The job of preparation of panel for filling up 34540 posts of teachers however was not easy and when complaints were made before the Apex Court that steps were not being taken by the Commission in preparation of the panel strictly as per the Rules, the preparation of such panel came under the scanner of the Apex Court and such panel ultimately was finalized under the orders of the Apex Court in the pending Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 297/2007 in Special Leave Petition No. 22882/2004 as would be evident from the order dated 7.12.2010, relevant portion whereof reads as follows:-
"A category-wise details of vacancies along with recommendation status has been filed on behalf of the State of Bihar today. In fact, with regard to the list which had been filed earlier by the State, a response has been filed on behalf of the petitioners from which it appears that there are certain incongruities in the furnished list. However, the said list does not cover all the names included in the list. The State of Bihar is given further four weeks' time to bring out a fresh list in terms of the orders passed on 9th December, 2009 and 12th May, 2010 in order of seniority incorporating each and every candidate and category to which they belong. The exercise Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 12 undertaken by the State does not reflect such state of affairs. The learned counsel for the petitioner in S.L.P.(Civil)No. 22882/2004 is requested to assist learned Standing Counsel for the State of Bihar in the exercise so that a complete chart can be made out and after proper scrutiny the candidates can be eliminated from the list. If possible, the objections raised with regard to some of the candidates having taken their B.Ed training from institution which had been de-recognised or un- recognised for the said purpose shall also be provided.
Let this matter be listed once again on 19th January, 2011 at 3.00 p.m. for further consideration. A copy of the list to be finalised and submitted to this Court should be provided to learned counsel for the respondents in the aforesaid Special Leave Petition at least a week before the next date of hearing. Other intervenors/parties who have been impleaded or have been given leave to intervene, may obtain copies of the same from the learned Advocate-on-Record for the respondents in the Special Leave Petition."
10. The Apex Court, by an order dated 19.1.2011 having found the issue of preparation of panel to be a jinxed one, had appointed Hon‟ble Justice V.A. Mohta, the retired Chief Justice of Orissa High Court to be the Special Officer in whose presence the panel was to be finalized in the manner prescribed by the Apex Court in its order dated 19.1.2011, relevant portion whereof reads as follows:-
"On 7th December, 2010, certain incongruities in the list of eligible candidates furnished by the State of Bihar, were pointed out on behalf of the petitioners. As a result, the State of Bihar was directed to bring out a fresh list within four weeks in terms of the orders passed on 9th December, 2009, Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 13 and 12th May, 2010, in order of seniority, incorporating the names of each and every candidate and the category to which they belonged. Since the exercise undertaken by the State did not reflect the same, today when the matter is taken up, a fresh list has been filed, but the incongruities still remain. It is also unfortunate that the petitioners were not effectively participating in the exercise, as a result of which the anomalies have not been completely eliminated. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and since we are of the view that the matter should not be allowed to linger any further, we have no other alternative but to direct that the list now submitted be reconsidered once again, but in the presence of the counsel of the respective parties and a senior advocate of this Court. The said exercise may involve three or four different stages. The first stage would be for the petitioners and those who have been allowed to intervene, to point out anomalies which according to them, still exist in the list and the same is to be pointed out to the learned counsel for the State of Bihar within two weeks from date. In addition, since a submission has been made by Mr. Upadhyay that certain names have not been included in the list, although they are eligible, he will be entitled to point out the same to the advocate for the State of Bihar within the said period. On receipt of the same, the State shall look into the objections, and, thereafter, arrange to obtain the records relating to each of such candidates in respect of whom such objections are raised. Within two weeks after such objections are filed, the second meeting shall be held in which the learned counsel for the State of Bihar and the other parties shall sit together to work out the anomalies or the incongruities. If necessary, further sittings may be held after four weeks to iron out all the creases, sort out all the anomalies and to work out a final list acceptable to all the parties, and, thereafter, to submit the same to this Court. For the aforesaid purpose, we appoint retired Judge of the Bombay High Court Justice V.A. Mohta, Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 14 who retired as the Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court, to be the Special Officer in whose presence the second and third stages will take place. The learned Special Officer will be associated with the settling of the objections that may be raised and the final list to be submitted under his signature. For the aforesaid purpose, objections, if any, shall be filed before the learned Advocate-on-Record for the State of Bihar by 31st January, 2011. The second meeting is to be convened on 19th February, 2011 at 10.00 a.m. in the Supreme Court Arbitration Centre, M.C. Setalvad Chambers or in the alternative, such meeting may also be held at the Arbitration Hall of the Neeti Bagh Club. At the said meeting the individual applications in respect of which objections are filed will have to be produced. In the event the matter cannot be settled on 19th February, 2011, it may be carried forward to the next day i.e. 20th February, 2011. A third meeting, if necessary, may also be convened on 5th March, 2011 on which date the list must be made ready and the list of eligible candidates must be finalised for submission to the Court.
Let this matter be adjourned till 29th March, 2011 at 3.00 p.m. In order that the matter is finally settled, learned counsel of the respective parties are requested to cooperate so that no further adjournment is required to be granted on 29th March, 2011. Learned senior counsel appearing for the parties are requested to render their assistance to finalise the matter. The learned Special Officer will also consider the objections that are raised and will submit a comprehensive report in respect thereafter, with regard to the eligibility of the candidates. The learned Special Officer will be entitled to fix his own remuneration and the same will be borne equally by the parties. Let a copy of this order be made available to the learned counsel of the respective parties and to the learned Special Officer Justice V.A. Mohta."
11. It would thus become clear that now the Apex Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 15 Court was directly monitoring even the preparation of the panel for appointment on the post of 34540 posts of teacher. The Apex Court again by an order dated 24.2.2011 having found inability on the part of Hon‟ble Justice V.A. Mohta to work as a Special Officer had substituted him by appointing Hon‟ble Justice S.K. Chattopadhaya, a retired Judge of Jharkhand High Court and had issued certain directions which again for the sake of clarity and convenience is quoted hereinbelow:-
"By our order dated 19th January, 2011, we had at the invitation of the parties and in order to put an end to the disputes, appointed Mr. Justice V.A. Mohta, a retired Judge of the Bombay High Court, who retired as Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court, to be the Special Officer, in whose presence the order of 19th January, 2011, could be worked out. However, the matter was mentioned by the learned Special Officer on 18th February, 2011, not before this Bench, but before the other regular Bench, and the matter was directed to be listed today, for considering the submissions made by the learned Special Officer. In fact, the matter had been mentioned on account of the personal difficulties of the Special Officer so appointed, with a request to relieve him of the assignment.
Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and in view of the fact that it may be more convenient for a retired Judge of a nearby High Court, who is also acquainted with the affairs in Bihar, to discharge the functions as entrusted to the Special Officer under our order of 19th January, 2011, we consider it appropriate to appoint Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya, a retired Judge of the Jharkhand Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 16 High Court, residing at "Peace Cottage", 58, North Office Para, Doranda, Ranchi (Jharkhand), as Special Officer in place of Mr. Justice V.A. Mohta. All other portions of the order dated 19th January, 2011, will remain in place. The learned Special Officer will be entitled to arrange his own schedule in consultation with Mr. Gopal Singh and Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, representing the State of Bihar and group of teachers. Both the learned Advocates will be at liberty to approach Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya for the said purpose.
In addition to the above, a suggestion has been made by Mr. R.P. Bhat, learned senior counsel appearing for some of the petitioners, that the burden of the Special Officer could be lightened, if certain steps are taken by the State authorities, prior to consideration of the matter by the Special Officer. He has indicated that those candidates, who had obtained certificates from fake Institutes, could be identified in relation to the Institutes themselves, and a list of such candidates could be prepared separately. It has also been suggested that those candidates, if appointed, who would have less than one year in service, could also be segregated to consider the relief that could be provided to them. A further submission was that one applicant may have made several applications. The same could also be dealt with so that only one of the applications which were complete in all respects, could be taken up for consideration in respect of that applicant. The rest of applications could be rejected.
Since the said suggestions appear to be quite appropriate, the State authorities are directed to take steps in terms of the aforesaid suggestions and to provide the Special Officer and the parties with the said information in the form of charts before the matter is taken up by the Special Officer. Liberty to mention."
12. Thereafter, the Apex Court again on being Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 17 informed with regard to certain grievances of the candidates as with regard to their non-inclusion in the panel had passed yet another order on 29.3.2011 giving the opportunity to make their submission before the Hon‟ble Justice S.K. Chattopadhaya, the Special Officer appointed by the Apex Court. To that extent, it would be useful to quote the order dated 29.3.2011, which reads as follows:-
"On 24th January, 2011, while appointing Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya, a retired Judge of the Jharkhand High Court, as Special Officer in place of Mr. Justice V.A. Mohta, to ensure that the directions contained in the order of 19th January, 2011, were implemented, we had also indicated that certain steps be taken by the State, which would help in removing anomalies and incongruities in the preparation of the final list, which was to be taken into consideration for the purposes of filling up the vacant posts.
Today, we are informed that Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for some of the petitioners, had spoken to Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya, and that a copy of the aforesaid order has also been forwarded to His Lordship. We are also informed that both Mr. Gopal Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State of Bihar and Mr. Upadhyay, have been requested by the learned Judge to meet him on 3rd April, 2011, and that the matter has been fixed for consideration on the said date.
However, it appears that the directions, which were indicated in our order of 24th February, 2011, have not yet been fully complied with, although, we are informed by Mr. Kailash Vasdev, learned senior counsel and Mr. Gopal Singh, Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 18 that a comprehensive list is ready, which contains various details regarding the status of each of the candidates. We are not satisfied with such a list only. We direct the State, in addition to the said list, to prepare the three separate lists, which we had indicated in our order of 24th February, 2011, within 1st April, 2011, and make over copies of the same to the learned Special Officer and Mr. Upadhyay, so that the same can also be scrutinized on behalf of the petitioners, when the matter is taken up by the learned Special Officer. Let this matter be listed for further consideration on 3rd May, 2011. Let this Bench be re-constituted on the said date for the aforesaid purpose.
Since there are a number of petitioners, who are represented by different counsel, apart from Mr. Upadhyay, one other counsel representing the other petitioners and nominated by them, will be entitled to make submissions before the learned Special Officer on behalf of the petitioners Let a compilation of the several orders passed by this Court in this matter be prepared, both by the State as well as by Mr. Upadhyaya, and let copies of the same be made available to the learned Special Officer on 3rd April, 2011."
13. From the records, it would appear that pursuant to the aforementioned order of the Apex Court, Hon'ble Justice S.K. Chattopadhaya, the Special Officer appointed by the Apex Court, had submitted his report on 8.7.2011, relevant portion whereof reads as follows:-
"Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned Advocate and Mr. Gopal Singh, learned State Counsel are present along with State Officials. Even today no one has appeared on behalf of the petitioner.
However, Mr. Santosh Kumar has gone through the final Seniority List filed before me today, by the State of Bihar through its Standing Counsel Mr. Gopal Singh.
Seniority List settled by me on 01.05.2011 was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court for its kind consideration Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 19 on 03.05.2011. After considering the same, the matter was adjourned to 12.05.2011. On the said date, the Hon'ble Court had directed that further objections which were filed on the said date were to be sent to me for consideration. In terms thereof, proceedings were held before me on 24.05.2011,
14.06.2011 and 02.07.2011 at Ranchi. After going through all the objections in detail and hearing parties at length on all dates, hearing was concluded on 02.07.2011 and the State of Bihar was directed to incorporate the changes settled by me and submit the final seniority list on 08.07.2011 at 7:00 for my authentication.
Accordingly, the State of Bihar has today submitted the Final Seniority List. I have been informed that all the pages have been initiated by officials of the Bihar Staff Selection Commission, which has been verified by me. Authentication of the list by affixing my rubber stamp on each page and signing the first page and the last page of each volume itself has taken considerable time. Four CDs containing the data have also been signed by me and have been given with the Final Seniority List to Mr. Gopal Singh, learned Counsel for the State of Bihar, for being filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court before the next date of hearing. Perusal of the List shows the following:-
01 Total No. of 1,23,149 Application Received
02. Total No. of 94,205 (1 to 94,205) Candidate in the merit list
03. Total No. of 4,790 (94,206 to 98,995) Candidate in Unrecognized Institute
04. Total No. of 7,147 (98,996 to 1,06,142) Candidates in Duplicate List
05. Total No. of 361 Candidates in Duplicate List but from Unrecognized Institute
06. Total No. of 17,007 (1,06,143 to Candidates in 1,23,149) Rejection List
07. Total No. of 1,084 Candidates in Rejection list but from Unrecognized Institute
08. Total No. of 6,235 Candidates from Unrecognized Institute
09. As per order of Supreme Court dated Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 20 03.05.2011 Total No. of Candidate from unrecognized Institute 6,238 were to be taken out from the merit list and to be kept at the bottom of merit list.
I accordingly settle the Final Seniority List today and submit for kind approval of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the Final Seniority List of 1,23,149 candidates running into 4032 pages for appointment to the post of 34,540 Assistant Teachers to be appointed in the State of Bihar in terms of the orders dated 09.12.2009 & 12.05.2010 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court under the Bihar Special Elementary Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2010 and the advertisement issued thereunder.
Today I have also been informed by the State that objections at Sr. 172 (wrongly typed as 174) was with respect to the candidate who had applied under the General category and not under the Urdu category.
Since the candidature of this person has been considered and not rejected by the State, accordingly, my order dated 02.07.2011 stands modified to this extent.
I deem it appropriate to observe that numerous objection petitions have continuously been received till date by me, by the Standing Counsel for the State, by the HRD Department and the Staff Selection Commission. All of these objection petitions received by me till date have been handed over to the State. With respect to a majority of them, at my instance, the State has also prepared a Status Report. Since the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 12.05.2011 is clear that only objections which were filed on 12.05.2011 were to be considered and that no further objections would be entertained, the same can not be considered by me.
Before parting, I wish to record my appreciation for the assistance rendered to me by all concerned.
Sd./-
08.07.11 S.K.Chattopadhyaya (Special Officer)"
14. The next order of the Apex Court dated 13.7.2011 would again be the evidence of the fact that even a single grievance of a candidate of not being considered or heard by the Special Officer was taken note of and redressed by the Apex Court Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 21 in course of its monitoring the preparation of final seniority list as would be evident from the extract of the order dated 13.7.2011, which reads as follows:-
"A submission has been made on behalf of one, Mr. Avinash Kumar, s/o Shri Babua Nand Pandey, whose claim was not considered by the learned Special Officer on account of the fact that he was unable to show that he was a party to the proceedings. However, as has been pointed out by Mr. Rama Murti, learned senior Advocate, and as verified from the record, it appears that Shri Avinash Kumar was, in fact, impleaded as a party in the proceedings by order dated 23rd April, 2009. Accordingly, the claim of Shri Avinash Kumar is also to be considered for appointment.
Let it be recorded that the learned Special Officer has furnished the final seniority list. Let this matter be listed for further consideration on 13th October, 2011, and let this Bench be reconstituted on the said date at 3.30 p.m. In the meantime, the State of Bihar shall take steps to finalize the Roster, in terms of the final seniority list. A copy of the final Roster prepared, may also be produced in the Court on that day.
The final seniority list prepared by the learned Special Officer, as filed in the Court today, be kept in the custody of the State. Let a copy of the Order Sheet of the proceedings before the learned Special Officer from Order No.6, dated 24th May, 2011, onwards filed in Court today, be kept on the records.
In the meantime, if there are any outstanding dues payable to the learned Special Officer, such payment should also be cleared."
15. The Apex Court, thereafter, on 13.10.2011 had passed a significant and detailed order approving the final merit Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 22 list by Hon‟ble Justice S.K. Chattopadhyay, the Special Officer and that order being very relevant is quoted herein below in- extenso:-
"Contempt Petition (C) No.297 of 2007, filed in S.L.P. (C) No.22882 of 2004, arose out of an alleged breach of undertaking said to have been given on 18th January, 2006, by the State of Bihar and the order passed on the basis thereof on 23rd January, 2006, by this Court in S.L.P. (C) No.22882- 22888 of 2004. As we have indicated in our order dated 9th January, 2009, a number of writ petitions had been filed against the State of Bihar, raising issues relating to recruitment of teachers in primary schools. At one stage, it was brought to our notice that on account of changes in the policy, trained teachers who were in place at the time when the undertakings were given, could not be accommodated. Accordingly, we had passed orders directing that the trained teachers who at one time were less than the number of vacant posts, should be given appointment in the vacancies that were available. Subsequently, however, there was some discrepancy as to the number of vacancies available as against the number of teachers to be accommodated. Accordingly, we adopted a figure from an advertisement which had been published for recruitment of primary school teachers and took the number of available vacancies to be 34,540.
We had directed that the said vacancies be filled up with the said number of trained teachers as a one-time measure to give effect to the undertakings which had been given on 18th January, 2006 and 23rd January, 2006. Accordingly, without issuing a Rule of Contempt, we had directed that the said vacancies be filled up from amongst the trained teachers, who are available in order of seniority.
Subsequently, however, it came to light that the number of candidates available were much more than the number of Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 23 vacancies and there were also serious doubts raised about the eligibility of some of the candidates and some of the institutions from which they alleged to have received their training. In our order of 19th January, 2011, we had indicated that certain incongruities had been pointed out on behalf of the petitioners with regard to the list of eligible candidates furnished by the State of Bihar.
As a result, the State of Bihar, was directed to bring out a fresh list in terms of the orders which we had passed on 9th December, 2009 and 12th May, 2010, in order of seniority, incorporating the names of each and every candidate and the category to which they belonged. As the lists prepared were disputed, we thought it fit that in order to resolve the anomalies, a neutral person should be entrusted with the work of settling the list over which the dispute had arisen and, accordingly, by the said order we appointed Justice V.A. Mohta, a retired Judge of the Bombay High Court, who retired as Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court, as Special Officer in whose presence the list could be settled. However, since Justice Mohta expressed his desire to be relieved of the responsibility, by our order dated 24th February, 2011, while relieving Justice V.A. Mohta of the responsibility of acting as the Special Officer, w appointed Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyay, a retired Judge of the Patna High Court in his place, to take up and complete the finalization of the seniority list.
Subsequently, several sessions were held by the learned Special Officer, at which the parties and the institutions were duly represented by counsel and His Lordship, thereafter, submitted a finalized list of the eligible candidates in order of seniority, taking into consideration the various institutions and the certificates produced by the candidates concerned. On the basis of the said list, we had requested the State of Bihar to prepare a Roster for the purpose of reservation of seats according to the different Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 24 reserved categories. Such exercise has also been undertaken and completed and the list prepared in terms of the Roster has also been produced in the Court in a sealed cover.
Today, when the matter is taken up, Mr. Kailash Vasdev, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Bihar, has raised some issues, which need to be clarified.
The first issue relates to the claim of one Shri Abhinesh Kumar, s/o Shri Babua Nand Pandey, that his case has not been considered by the learned Special Officer on account of the fact that he was not a party to the proceedings. On 13th July, 2011, Mr. Rama Murti, learned senior Advocate, submitted that Shri Abhinesh Kumar had, in fact, been impleaded as a party and, accordingly, we had directed the State of Bihar to consider his place in the seniority list as well. Today, we are informed by Mr. Kailash Vasdev that his position stands at serial number 62,551, which is far beyond the number of vacancies to be filled up. Accordingly, nothing further is required to be said at the present, as far as his claim is concerned.
The second issue which has been raised by Mr. Kailash Vasdev is with regard to the examination of the certificates and other documents that may be produced by the candidate concerned at the time of counselling and appointment. In the event, during scrutiny it is found that any of the documents do not conform to the requirements, the concerned authorities will be at liberty to take appropriate steps regarding the said candidate.
The third issue raised was with regard to the candidates, who are to retire at the age of 60 by 31st January, 2012, within which period they would have attained the age of 60 years. It is no doubt true that this matter has been pending for a long time and there is possibility of some candidates being adversely affected on account of such delay, but at the same time we cannot also overlook the fact that a person cannot be allowed the benefits of appointment without serving Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 25 the institution for at least some length of time. Accordingly, the cases of the candidates who will be retiring on or before 31st January, 2012, need not be considered for appointment.
Fourthly, the Special Recruitments Rules, which have been framed by the State for the purpose of appointment of primary teachers in these vacancies, shall be deemed to have been modified to the extent of the directions which have been issued by this Court from time to time and also by this order.
There is yet another group of candidates, who claim to be adversely affected by the deliberations and the findings of the learned Special Officer while preparing the list of eligible candidates. It has been claimed by some of the candidates that their institutions have been shown to be unrecognized/fake, whereas from the very same institution other candidates have been found eligible, although, this has not been admitted by Mr. Kailash Vasdev, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Bihar, we feel if that is the case, such candidates should not be deprived of an opportunity in future. Accordingly, we direct that such candidates will be at liberty to apply to the Bihar Staff Selection Commission for reconsideration of their status and the status of their institutions in respect of which objections have not been considered by the Special Officer. If such representations are made, the same should be considered and disposed of by the Commission, after giving the candidates an opportunity of hearing and placing their cases before the Commission and if it is found that their cases are genuine, the said candidates should be considered in future vacancies, when other vacancies are available, in order of seniority.
There is one more issue, which has been raised by Mr. Kailash Vasdev, and that will be evident from the chart which has been submitted by him showing the distribution of posts. According to the requirement of the posts for Physical Education Teachers, the number shown is 1084, whereas in terms of the distribution of the number of vacancies amongst Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 26 34,540 candidates, the figure shown is 4,972, which means that there is an excess number of posts vis-a-vis the number of candidates actually required. On the other hand, as far as Urdu as a subject is concerned, while the requirement is 12,862 in terms of the distribution of posts, the figure has been shown as 1,509, which falls far short of the required number of candidates. Accordingly, Mr. Vasdev has submitted that the excess number of posts in the Physical Education Subject category may be allowed to be shifted to the Urdu Subject category, which would compensate the Urdu Subject category to some extent. We feel that there is substance in such a submission and, accordingly, we allow such prayer as well. The State Government will be at liberty to transfer the excess vacancies in the Physical Education Group to the Urdu Subject category.
This brings us to the end of a long and arduous journey regarding the appointment of trained teachers in terms of the undertaking given in this Court by the State Government. We would like to express our deep sense of appreciation to Justice S.K. Chattopadhyay for having undertaken the tedious and painstaking exercise of finalising the list of eligible candidates to be considered for filling up the 34,540 vacancies identified during these proceedings.
We are informed that nothing remains to be paid to the learned Special Officer on account of his remuneration.
We also express our appreciation to all the counsel who appeared and helped us to resolve this matter for the benefit of the large number of trained teachers in Bihar who were waiting for appointment all these years.
Let the original Roster, as well as the seniority list, which have been produced before us in a sealed cover and is at present lying in the custody of Mr. Gopal Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Bihar, be sent to the Human Resource Department, Government of Bihar, for implementing this order. We make it clear that since the Roster, as well as Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 27 the seniority list, have been prepared in terms of the order of this Court, no Court shall entertain any other objections or applications with regard to the same.
The contempt petition, as well as the pending interlocutory applications are also disposed of by this order."
16. From reading of the aforesaid order not only containing the history of the entire facts leading to steps being taken for appointment on 34540 posts but also preparation of the final merit list, it would be clear that each and every grievance raised either by even the individuals alike Shri Abhinesh Kumar or the specific group of the persons whose institution were shown to be un-recognized and fake were specifically addressed to by the Special Officer and the Apex Court. In fact, the Apex Court had also made it clear that for such of the institutions of the candidates which were declared to be fake/unrecognized and from whom other candidates even of the same academic had been found eligible, the remedy for them was to move the Commission for reconsideration of the status and if the Commission would find their cases to be genuine, they would be considered for "future vacancy".
17. It is again in this order that the Apex Court had settled the issue of distribution of number of vacancies by pointing out that though in the requisition the number of posts of Physical Education Teacher was 1084 but the vacancy in fact was 4972. On Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 28 the other hand, for the post of Urdu subject, though the requirement was of 12862 teachers the figure of eligible candidates in the list was shown to be 1509. The Apex Court, therefore, had accepted the proposal of the State of Bihar that the excess number of posts of Physical Education subject category should be shifted to Urdu Teachers and liberty was given to the State Government to transfer the excess vacancy of teachers of Physical Education to the teachers of Urdu subject category.
18. The matter in fact for all purposes came to an end with the aforementioned order of the Apex Court dated 13.10.2011 whereafter the process of appointment had started against 34540 posts of teachers strictly as per the list finalized by the Apex Court and while 32127 posts had been filled up, 2413 posts had remained vacant.
19. It is a matter of record that in terms of the aforesaid direction of the Apex Court in the order dated 13.10.2011, the Commission, in keeping with the panel position of 94205 eligible candidates, had finalized the names of 34540 candidates strictly in accordance with the provisions made in the rules read with terms of the advertisement and had sought to fill up 28600 posts of general subject teachers, 4827 posts for Urdu subject teachers and 1113 posts from physical subject teacher. Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 29 Thus, when the panel drawn by the Commission was sent to the Government, it was given a wide circulation as also uploaded on the website of the Education Department on 21.12.2011 for general information to all the candidates. A press communiqué was also issued in the newspaper setting out the time schedule for appointment on 10.1.2012 and the process of appointment was sought to be completed in between 21.1.2012 to 7.2.2012.
20. The appointment of the petitioner was also made in terms of the order of the Apex Court and follow up action taken by the State of Bihar. The District Educaton Officer, West Champaran, Bettiah while issuing appointment letter of the petitioner dated 17.2.2012 had specifically incorporated Condition No. VIII and IX laying down that in the event of certificates of qualification/ training found to be forged/ incorrect as well as institution from which such qualification was acquired by the petitioner to be unrecognized, his appointment was liable to be cancelled. To that extent it would be relevant to quote the terms of appointment of the petitioner contained in his appointment letter dated 17.2.2012:
dk;kZy;&ftyk f'k{kk inkf/kdkjh] i0 pEikj.k] csfr;kA ^^vkns'k** ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ubZ fnYyh }kjk voekuukokn la[;k 297@2007 esa ikfjr vkns'k ds vuqikyu esa jkT; ljdkj }kjk iz[;kfir ^^fcgkj fo'ks"k izkjafHkd f'k{kd fu;qfDr fu;ekoyh 2010** rFkk foHkkxh; funs'k ¼i=kad 4 fnukad 18-01-2012 ,oa funs'kd izkFkfed f'k{kk] f'k{kk foHkkx ds i=kad 124 fnukad 10-02- Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 30 2012 ds vkyksd esa bl ftyk ds fy, vuq'kaflr lkekU; fo"k; ds f'k{kd@mnwZ@f'k{kd 'kkjhfjd f'k{kd ¼tkas ykxw ugha gks mls dkV nsa½ ds fuEukafdr vH;fFkZ;ksa dks izkjafHkd fo|ky;ksa eas lgk;d f'k{kd ds in ij is cSaM&P2-xszM is&4200 esa fu;qDr djrs gq, muds uke ds lkeus vafdr fo|ky; esa ;ksxnku dh frfFk ls inLFkkfir fd;k tkrk gSA& vuq'kaflr vH;FkhZ dk uke firk@ifr dk uke inLFkkfir iz[k.M ojh;rk lwph fo|ky; dk dk dzekad uke 766 Jaiprakash Baitha Sri Foolchandra jk0 e0 fo0 ukSru Baitha eMqvkgkaW fu;qfDr laca/kh 'krsZa& ¼i½- ;g fu;qfDr iw.kZr% vLFkk;h gksxhA mEehnokjksa ds fy, fu/kkZfjr lsokdkyhu izf'k{k.k iqjk djus rFkk izek.k i=ksa dh tkap ds mijkUr U;wure ,d lky dk lsok vof/k iwjk gksus ds mijkUr gh lsok lEiq"V dh tk,xhA ¼ii½- mEehnokjksa dh vkilh ojh;rk vk;ksx }kjk vuq'kaflr ojh;rk lwph ds vuq:i gksxhA ¼iii½- fcgkj deZpkjh p;u vk;ksx }kjk ;fn fdlh vuq'kaflr mEehnokj ds laca/k esa dksbZ izfrdwy vuq'kalk izkIr gksrh gS rks rnuqlkj mEehnokj dh ojh;rk ,oa fu;qfDr izHkkfor gksxhA ¼iv½- fu;qfDr i= fuxZr gksus ds 15 fnuksa ds vUrxZr inLFkkfir fo|ky; esa ;ksxnku djuk gksxkA ¼v½- fu;qDr f'k{kdksa ds osrueku ,oa lkekU; lsok 'krsZa ogh gksxk tks iwoZ ds ftyk laoxZ ds fu;qDr f'k{kd ds gSA fdUrq isa'kukfn gsrq ;s f'k{kd jkT; ljdkj ds va'knk;h isa'ku ;kstuk ls vPNkfnr gkssaxsA ¼vi½- ;ksxnku ds le; flfoy ltZu ds Lrj ls fuxZr LokLF;
izek.k i= nsuk gksxkA ¼vii½- lEc} iz/kkuk/;kid@iz/kku f'k{kd dks funsZ'k fn;k tkrk gS fd lEcaf/kr vH;FkhZ ds lHkh izek.k i=ksa dks lR;kiu gsrq muds ;ksxnku ds 24 ?kaVs ds vanj lEc} laLFkk dks HksatsaxsA lR;kiu mijkar dh fLFkfr ls v|ksgLrk{kjh dks lwfpr djsaxsA ¼viii½- izek.k i=ksa ds tkap ds mijkUr izek.k i= QthZ@xyr ik;s tkus ij fu;qfDr jn~n djrs gq, Hkqxrku dh x;h jkf'k dh ,d eq'r olwyh dh tk;sxh ,oa dkuwuh dkjZokbZ Hkh dh tk;sxhA ¼ix½- laLFkk dks vekU; ik, tkus ij vFkok izek.k&i= ekU; ugha gksus ij fu;qfDr dks jn~n djrs gq, dkuwuh dkjZokbZ dh tk,xhA ¼x½- izek.k&i= QthZ ik;s tkus ij fu;qfDr dks jn~n dj nh tk,xhA ¼xi½- izek.k&i=ksa ds lR;kiuksjkar gh osru vkfn dk Hkqqxrku fd;k tk,xkA ¼xii½- ;g fu;qfDr&i= vkSicaf/kd fu;qfDr i= gSA g0@& ftyk f'k{kk inkf/kdkjh] Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 31 i0 pEikj.k] csfr;kA Kkikad 1359 @ csfr;k] fnukad 17@2@2012**
21. Thus, when the petitioner had produced his certificate of teachers training qualification of Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad the matter was not only examined at the District level but also at the level of the Director, Primary Education which after getting the matter verified that Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad was not a recognized institution either by the State of U.P. or had ever been accorded the recognition and approval by the National Council of Teachers Education (NCTE), such qualification of teachers training was not to be recognized for the purposes of appointment of teachers in terms of the provisions made in the Rules followed by the advertisement laying down the qualification of teachers training to be only from the recognized institution by the concerned State Government. Thus, when a direction has been issued by the Director, Secondary Education in his letter No. 332 dated 15.5.2012 which was again reiterated in the earlier decision of the Government contained in letter No. 395 dated 30.10.2008 there was hardly any scope for the District Education Officer to allow the petitioner to continue in service, inasmuch as not a single person appointed on the basis of Teachers Training qualification from Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow was retained in service.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 32
22. This Court in fact has already quoted the Rules laying down the qualification which leaves nothing for speculation that the qualification of Teachers Training in terms of Rule 3(iii) had clearly prescribed that the candidates having acquired Teachers Training qualification prior to 1995 had to fulfil of obtaining Teachers Training from any recognized institution of a State and those acquiring qualification of Teachers Training after 1995 had to acquire qualification of Teachers Training only from from the institutions recognized and approved by NCTE. The petitioner has very clerverly not even mentined the year of passing of Teachers Training Examination in the writ petition. He has also not brought anything on record to show that Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow for importing Teachers Training qualification was recognized/ approved institution under the provisions of NCTE Act. Thus, there would be no difficulty in holding that the Government decision declaring the qualification of Teachers Training from Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow to be an invalid qualification will also cover the case of the petitioner.
23. The plea that the appointment of the petitioner was made pursuant to the order of the Apex Court after finalization of the panel under the supervision of the Apex Court will also have hardly any impact on this Court, inasmuch as the order of the Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 33 Apex Court dated 13.10.2011 had itself made it clear that if during scrutiny of the certificates of qualification/ training after appointment it was discovered that any of the document did not conform to the requirement of the qualification laid down under the Rules/ advertisement, the authority concerned will be at liberty to take appropriate steps against such candidates. Thus, this Court would find that the order of the Apex Court dated 13.10.2011 had given full power and jurisdiction to the authority to make scrutiny of the qualification of the petitioner and also to take action against him. In fact it was for this purpose that the specific clauses in this regard in the appointment of the petitioner were mentioned which has already been quoted above. Thus, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the appointment of the petitioner could not have been terminated because his appointment was made after approval of the panel by the Apex Court has obviously no merit.
24. At this stage, a submission has been made by learned counsel for the petitioner that the appointment of the petitioner was also saved by the observations made under the order dated 18.07.2013 and the learned counsel for the petitioner has led stress on that portion of the order of the Apex Court dated 18.07.2013 wherein according to him, it was said that appointment Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 34 of the teachers already made shall not be disturbed. This Court, however, is not in a position to accept the submission for a simple reason that if the whole tenure of the order dated 18.07.2013 of the Apex Court is taken into consideration, it would become clear that same was passed in respect of filling up the remaining 2413 posts. This would become more clear form the subsequent events who have taken place after the appointment of the petitioner and others were made.
25. It is very significant to note here that in course of making appointment from the approved panel/merit list of 94205 candidates when appointments were made against 34540 posts, the State Government not only in keeping with the directions of the Apex Court but also keeping with the provisions made in 2010 Rules as well as clause-3 of the Advertisement on account of non availability of adequate number of candidates in reserved category/Urdu subject had decided to fill up the remaining such vacancies from amongst the candidates of unreserved category of the general subjects. This would become more clear from the following table:-
Category or Number of Number of Number of Vacant number of subject of Posts Posts decided Actual posts teacher Advertised to be filled up Appointments in terms of made Rules General 20594 28600 26593 2007 Subject Urdu Subject 12862 4827 4455 372 Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 35 Physical 1084 1113 1079 34 Training Subject Total 34,500 34,500 32,127 2413
26. It also has to be kept in mind that the process for aforesaid appointment was sought to be completed in respect of entire 34540 posts of teacher and 2413 posts could not be finally filled up on account of constraints during consideration, inasmuch as, 1929 candidates did not turn up for counseling, whereas case of 366 candidates were kept pending for final decision and rest of the 118 candidates were found to be ineligible on account of non fulfillment of the eligibility criteria.
27. The State Government, thus, having completed the exercise for filling up the 34540 posts of teachers in which 2413 posts had remained vacant on account of the reasons as indicated above in the preceding paragraphs, had also submitted before the Apex Court a status report dated 30.8.2012 which being very relevant for the purpose of understanding the ultimate order passed by the Apex Court on 18.7.2013 which is the subject in issue in all these writ applications, is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"Status Report with respect to appointment of 34,540 posts of Assistant Teachers in Elementary Schools in Bihar, in terms of the directions dated 13.10.2011 of this Hon'ble Court, by way of affidavit.
I, Ashutosh, aged about 48 years, son of Late Gurucharan Lal, resident of F-202 Amarkunj Apartment, Vivekanand Marg, Boring Road, Patna, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 36
1. That I am the Director (Primary), Education Department (erstwhile Human Resource Development Department). I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of his case from a perusal of the records of this case in my official capacity. I am authroized to swear this affidavit. Hence I am competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That the Final revised List of 34,540 candidates, in terms of the direction of this Hon'ble Court dated 13.10.2011, was received by the Education Department from the Bihar Staff Selection Commission on 19.12.2011. The Subject-wise and Category-wise number of candidates required to be appointed was as follows:-
i. General subjects 28,600 ii. Urdu subjects 4,827 iii. Physical 1,113 34,540
3. That the seniority list was uploaded on the website of the Education Department (www.educationibihar.in) on 21.12.2011 for general information to the candidates. A press communiqué was also issued in the newspaper. A press communiqué regarding the Time Schedule for appointment was again published in the important newspaper of the State on 10.01.2012, which was as follows:-
i. District-wise list of 21.01.2012
candidates uploaded on
website
www.educationbihar.in
ii verification of Urdu and Physical Subject:
certificates/ documents 23.01.2012 to 25.01.2012 General Subject: 30.01.2012 to 03.02.2012 iii Handing over of Urdu and Physical Subject:
appointment letters 30.01.2012 to 31.01.2012 General Subject: 06.02.2012 to 07.02.2012
4. That in fact, the district-wise list of candidates was uploaded a little earlier on the website on 17.01.2012 itself, instead of the stipulated date of 21.01.2012, for information to the candidates.
Detailed instructions were issued to the district authorities for the appointment process and verification of certificates of the candidates on 18.01.2012. The district authorities verified the certificates of the candidates on the announced dates. Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 37
5. That the status of the candidates appointed after verification of their certificates is as follows:-
Subjects Posts available Posts filled Posts vacant General 28600 26593 2007 Subject Urdu 4827 4455 372 Subject Physical 34540 32127 2413 Subject
6. That the status of the posts which have remained vacant is follows:-
Subject Candidates Candid not Candidates whose Total absent found fit for appointment is during appointment pending counseling General 1636 104 267 2007 Subject Urdu 267 14 91 372 Subject Physical 26 0 8 34 Subject Total 1929 118 366 2413
7. That the caste-wise detail of the 1636 candidates of the General Subjects, who have remained absent is given below:-
Unreserved 807
Scheduled Castes 331
Scheduled Tribes 26
Extremely Backward Castes 319
Backward Castes 112
Backward Castes (Women) 41
Total 1636
8. That the certificates of the candidates have not been verified from their concerned Boards or Universities before their appointment. The appointment of some candidates, especiallythe candidates having degrees from other States & Union Territories and from Private Training Institutions has been done on the condition that payment of their salary will take place after the verification of certificates. Verification of certificates by the district authorities is underway.
9. That regarding the First Category, comprising of 1929 candidates who were absent on their date of counseling, it is submitted that the Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 38 State may be permitted to examine each case afresh and if some candidates are found eligible for appointment in their own caste- wise category and as per the training session up to which the candidates having lower position in the seniority list have been appointed, they may also be appointed.
10. That the Second Category, comprising of 118 candidates who were not found fit for appointment for one reason or another, it is submitted that the State may be permitted to examine their candidature afresh and make appointments, if found in order.
11. That the third category, comprising of 336 candidates whose cases have been kept pending, are mainly of the following two types:-
i. Difference in case category and in training session, as mentioned in the seniority list.
ii. Some doubts about the degree of training and bonafide of the candidates due to difference in photograph.
The State may be permitted to examine their candidature and afresh and make appointments, if found in order.
12. That it is respectfully submitted that if this Hon'ble Court permits the State of Bihar to make appointments to the 2413 posts which are remaining vacant, the Seniority List prepared by the Learned Special Officer which had been approved by this Hon'ble Court, subject to some directions, by its order dated 13.10.2011, should also be permitted to be deemed modified to that extent.
13. That the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge derived from the official records which I believe to be true. No part of the same is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
Sd./-
30.8.12 DEPONENT VERIFICATION Verified that the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge derived from the official records which I believe to be true. No part of the same is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
Sd./-
30.8.12 DEPONENT"
28. The order dated 18.7.2013 was thus passed by the Apex Court in the light of the aforementioned stand taken by the State in its status report. The order of the Apex court dated Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 39 18.07.2013 had itself covered the brief background in which the entire exercise for filling up the post of 34540 vacancies on the post of Teachers in primary school had been undertaken and completed. The said order of the Apex Court dated 18.7.2013, therefore, which has a direct nexus for deciding the issue involved in the batch of these writ applications, is also quoted hereinbelow:-
"1. Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 22882-22888 of 2004 were filed by several trained teachers for a direction upon the State of Bihar to appoint them in the vacancies in the post of primary teachers in the State of Bihar. The same was withdrawn on an undertaking given on behalf of the State of Bihar on 18th January, 2006, whereby the State of Bihar committed itself to recruiting and filling up the vacant posts of teachers in primary schools with trained teachers. The undertaking given by the State of Bihar reads as follows:- "That in the meantime, it has been decided that trained teachers be recruited on the vacant posts available in the State of Bihar. The Bihar Elementary Teachers Appointment Rules, 2003 having been quashed by the Patna High Court, new recruitment rules are contemplated to facilitate recruitment of trained teachers in a decentralized manner, by giving them age relaxation as ordered by the High Court. That Chapters 6 and 7 of the Bihar Education Code relating to oriental education and hostels and messes will be kept in mind, as directed by the Patna High Court, while making recruitment of teachers. That it is respectfully submitted that since the number of available trained teachers in the State is expected to be less than the available vacancies, no test for selection is required to that extent, a reference to this Bihar Public Service Commission for initiating the process of recruitment of trained teachers may not be necessary, and the order of this Hon'ble Court and of the Patna High Court in this regard may be modified" 2. The application made for withdrawal of the Special Leave Petition was disposed of by this Court on 23rd January, 2006. Subsequently, when the State of Bihar failed to abide by its commitments and assurances, the petitioner, Nand Kishore Ojha, Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 40 filed Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 207 of 2006, and the same was disposed of with a direction upon the State of Bihar to implement the undertaking given earlier, upon a categorical statement being made that priority would be given to the trained teachers in matters of appointment in the said posts.
3. Thereafter, on account of further default on the part of the State of Bihar to honour its commitments, another Contempt Petition, being Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 297 of 2007, was filed and several applications were made in the Contempt Petition by trained teachers similarly situated, for being impleaded as parties to the proceedings. Ultimately, the learned Attorney General appeared before us on 25th August, 2009, and assured us that it was not the intention of the State of Bihar to resile from the undertaking given on its behalf. Since there had been a change in the administrative set up in the State of Bihar, the situation had become more complex and it had become difficult to work out a solution to the problem posed in filling up the vacancies in the post of primary school teachers throughout the State of Bihar. When Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 297 was taken up for consideration, we heard the same along with several interlocutory applications filed by several teaches having individual grievances and reserved judgment.
4. By our order dated 13th October, 2011, on the Contempt Petition filed in SLP(C) No. 22882 of 2004, arising out of the breach of undertaking given on 18th January, 2006, by the State of Bihar (illegible) passed on the basis thereof on 23 January, 2006 in the aforesaid SLP, we had passed orders directing that the trained teachers who at one time were less than the number of vacant posts should be given appointment in the vacancies that were available.
Subsequently, however, there was some discrepancy as to the number of vacancies available as against the number of teachers to be accommodated. Accordingly, we adopted a figure from an advertisement, which had been published for recruitment of primacy school teachers and took the number of available vacancies to be 34,540. We had further directed that the said vacancies be filled up with the said number of trained teachers as a one time measure to give effect to the undertakings given on 18th January, 2006 and 23rd January, 2006.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 41
5. Subsequently, it came to light that the number of candidates available were much more than the number of vacancies and there were also serious doubts raised about the eligibility of some of the candidates and the genuineness of some of the institutions from which they alleged to have received their training. In our order of 19th January, 2011, we had indicated that certain incongruities had been pointed out on behalf of the petitioners with regard to the list of eligible candidates furnished by the State of Bihar.
6. When the said dispute could not be resolved in terms of the list produced by the State of Bihar, we thought it fit to entrust a neutral person with the work and, accordingly, we had appointed Justice V.A. Mohta, a retired Judge of the Bombay High Court, we retired as Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court, as Special Officer in whose presence the list could be settled. However, since Justice Mohta expressed his desire to be relieved of the responsibility, by our order dated 24th February, 2011, while relieving Justice V.A. Mohta, we appointed Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyay, a retired Judge of the Patna High Court in his place, to take up and complete the finalization of the seniority list. After much debate, the list submitted by Justice Chattopadhyay was accepted and in terms of the recommendations made, 34,540 candidates were appointed in different primary schools in the State of Bihar.
7. The matter did not end there. On account of the fact that some of the candidates, who had not appeared before Justice Chattopadhyay, came up with fresh applications in support of their cases and urged that there were various omissions from the final select list, we decided to entertain the said applications, particularly, on account of the directions, which we had given, in our judgment and order dated 13th October, 2011, that no court would entertain any objection or applications with regard to the list of candidates, who had already been appointed, in terms of our earlier order.
8. During the hearing of these applications, special leave petitions and writ petitions, what emerged is that most of the applicants Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 42 were aggrieved by some defect or the other in the preparation of the select list, which occurred on account of the failure of the candidates to give their relevant particulars to Justice Chattopadhyay.
9. Be that as it may, in the event, some discrepancies had crept in the final select list, the individual grievances contained various anomalies, which it is difficult for us to unravel. Accordingly, we modify our order dated 13th October, 2011, and allow the applicants to approach the High Court for redressal of their grievances. We also direct that the applications, special leave petitions and writ petitions filed before us be treated as withdrawn, with liberty to the parties to approach the High Court individually or otherwise, for relief, if any, but without, in any way, affecting the appointments of those teachers who have already been appointed against the vacant 34,540 posts and are working. We have been informed during the hearing that about 2413 posts out of the 34,540 posts were still left to be filled up. All the applications, Special Leave Petitions and Writ Petitions are, therefore, disposed of in the light of the aforesaid observations. We make it clear that none of the persons appointed out of the 34,540 vacancies should be disturbed in any way, but the question of filling up the balance vacancies may be taken into consideration, while disposing of the applications in question."
29. In the backdrop of the aforementioned order of the Apex Court dated 18.7.2013 this Court has already considered a large number of cases which has been disposed of in the case of Kanti Kumari (supra), operative portion whereof reads as follows:
"(i) For filling up 2413 posts, a Committee consisting of Director, Primary Education and Secretary to the Bihar Staff Selection Commission shall take any decision with the approval of Principal Secretary of Education Department. In case of difference of opinion between the two functionaries, namely, Director, Primary Education and Secretary to the Bihar Staff Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 43 Selection Commission, the decision taken by the Principal Secretary of the Education Department shall be final.
(ii) The Committee shall first issue notice in the newspaper for appearance of the 1929 candidates for counseling as per paragraph no. 7(a) of the counter affidavit filed in this case as has also been extracted earlier in paragraph no.28 of this judgment. Such counseling of 1929 candidates must be completed within a maximum period of three months and letter of appointment to the eligible candidates having prescribed qualification and fulfiling other eligibility conditions must be issued within one month of the date of completing the counselling.
(iii) The cases of 366 candidates again reflected in paragraph no. 7(c) of the counter affidavit shown to be pending also must be decided one way or the other within the same period of three months and those found eligible should also be given letter of appointment in next one month.
(iv) In the likewise manner, the Committee also must re-consider the case of 118 candidates not earlier found fit for appointment as again explained in paragraph no.7(b) of the counter affidavit and take a final decision in respect of them within the same period of three months and those found eligible among them should also be given letter of their appointment in next one month.
(v) Depending on the result of such exercise of fresh consideration of the cases of aforesaid 2413 candidates who were either absent during counseling or whose cases for appointment was kept pending or whose cases earlier was not found fit for appointment as explained in paragraph no.7 of the counter affidavit and upon issuance of appointment letters to those found eligible, they shall be given one month‟s time for joining their post from their date of issuance of their Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 44 appointment letter inserting a clause that if they do not join their post within the prescribed period, they shall forfeit their claim for appointment against 2413 posts for once and ever.
(vi) The Committee on expiry of the period of one month for joining of the eligible appointment from amongst aforesaid 2413 candidates shall obtain a district wise report of their joining in next one month and reascertain the position of left over vacancy on 2413 posts.
(vii) The Committee having taken the aforesaid steps and completed the exercise for considering the 2413 posts and on being reported the number of actual number candidates who had ultimately submitted their joining will re-ascertain the number of vacant posts in the respective subject category and would publish them in the newspaper as also on its official website inviting claims in a prescribed format from the left over candidates whose applications were received in time by the Commission and had formed part of 123149 of the total applications received as shown in the report of Hon'ble Justice S.K. Chattopadhyay the Special Officer submitted to Apex Court.
(viii) This inviting of claim must be done by the Committee within three months of issuance of last appointment letter to the category of 2413 candidates giving a clear one month time to remaining candidates to submit their respective claim in writing in a prescribed format only by registered/ speed post. In no case any claim shall be entertained by receipt through hand in the department/commission.
(ix) The Committee only in exceptional cases and that too for reasons recorded in writing shall make any change in the seniority position in final panel of 94205 candidates as approved by the Apex Court on 13.10.2011 confining itself to make such correction in cases of clear clerical error or error of Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 45 record or any other allied compelling reason. It is made clear that for such appointment only on the remaining vacancy after considering the cases of pending 2413 candidates, the revised merit list will be prepared not only in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in 2010 Rules and the advertisement but also in keeping with the statement made by the Respondents in paragraph no. 9(a) and 9(b) of the counter affidavit as also in the light of findings recorded in paragraphs 35 to 81 of this judgment.
(x) Such tentative revised merit list for the left over vacancies for each of the three subject teacher of general/ Urdu/Physical Training after considering the claims shall be published in newspaper and official website of the Education inviting objection and thereafter on considering such objection the revised merit list shall be finalized and made public both in newspaper and official website. This entire exercise however must be completed by the Committee within six months of publication of notice inviting the initial claim from the candidates.
(xi) It is from this revised panel for the limited number of vacancy left out after consideration of 2413 pending cases in the manner indicated above, that steps for appointment for left over vacancy will be completed within two months of publication of the final panel. In no event, such appointments however shall be made beyond the number of post for each subject category which is 2007 for the general subject, 372 for Urdu teacher and 34 for Physical Trained Teacher as clearly stated before the Apex Court and this Court in the status report dated 30.08.2012 and the counter affidavit respectively."
30. It has to be also kept in the mind that aforesaid finding of direction given in the case of Kanti Kumari (supra) has been also approved by the Division Bench in its judgemnt dated Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 46 24.03.2015 in L.P.A. No. 1491 of 2014 (Bijendra Kumar Singh and others Vs. The State of Bihar and others) and its analogous cases wherein it has been held as follows:-
"Therfore, the appeals are dismissed, upholding the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 17899 of 2012 and batch. It is, however, left open to the individual candidates to agitate their trievance before the Committee which, in turn, shall take the same into account, but shall stick to the same procedure that was followed in the selection of 32,127 teachers on the previous occasion."
31. As a matter of fact this case was being heard together with the case of Kanti Kumari (supra) but on a prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners it was segregated for its being disposed of separately. The only over emphasised submission that even a Matriculate with 100 marks of Urdu subject will qualify for the post of Urdu teacher has also been examined and decided by this Court in the aforesaid case of Kanti Kumari (supra) wherein it has held as follows:-
"55. In C.W.J.C No. 25145 of 2013, the sole petitioner has sought a direction for his appointment against 2413 post of teachers on the ground that in the final select list the name of the petitioner was placed in the category of ineligible candidates at serial no. 114342 with a remark that he did not fulfill the requirement of the post of Urdu teacher as his full marks of Urdu was less than 200. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had passed his matriculation examination in the year 1998 with Urdu as one of the compulsory subject of 100 marks, whereafter he was also admitted in the teacher's training course for the session 1990-92 Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 47 and had also completed his teacher's training course and yet he was disqualified by wrongly interpreting the clause of qualification.
56. This Court would find that the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification for the post of Urdu teacher which under 2010 Rules clearly laid down that for the post of Urdu teacher, a candidate must have passed Maulvi examination from Bihar Madarsa Education Board or any examination equivalent to intermediate standard or any equivalent examination with Urdu subject of 200 marks. The moment the petitioner admits that he had passed any matriculation examination with Urdu of 100 marks, he cannot be said to be qualified in terms of the qualification laid down in the 2010 Rules which has been already quoted above. For teaching of Urdu subject if the 2010 Rules had required passing of Maulvi examination of the intermediate standard to be a compulsory qualification and its equivalence was also well defined by inserting the provision of passing intermediate examination with Urdu subject of 200 marks, the petitioner in no view of the matter may be said to be qualified for the post of Urdu teacher.
57. Thus, this Court would find it difficult to interfere with the approved merit list where under the orders of the Apex Court the name of the petitioner has been included at serial no. 114342 in the category of ineligible candidates.
32. Moreover apart from the aforesaid view of this Court in the case of Kanti Kumari (supra), from a reading of the aforementioned order of the Apex Court dated 18.7.2013, nothing is left for speculation that it had not only approved the list (panel) prepared by Hon‟ble Justice S.K. Chattopadhyay in capacity of Special Officer but had also approved the selection of 34540 Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 48 candidates for their appointment as is specifically mentioned in the underlined portion in paragraph no.6 of the aforesaid order. As a matter of fact, the little ray of hope was created in paragraph no.9 of the order which however has to be understood in the context that no appointment already made in terms of the approved panel were to be disturbed. That would mean that even for those 2413 cases where the offer of appointment was already under process as per their seniority in the approved panel, they were also not to be disturbed unless their cases was altogether rejected. This also becomes clear from the status report filed by the State of Bihar before the Apex Court on 30.8.2012 as quoted above.
33. It thus becomes clear that the order of the Apex Court dated 18.7.2013 was in no way related to the petitioner whose appointment was made in the month of January to February 2012 and was removed from service in the month of March 2013 by two separate orders one passed by the District Education Officer, Siwan dated 29.6.2012 and the other passed by the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gopalganj dated 3.9.2012.
34. As a matter of fact this writ application filed after more than 2½ years of termination of the service of the petitioner, inasmuch as the services of the petitioner were terminated on Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 49 20.3.2013, whereas this writ application was filed only on 4.9.2015 is wholly belated and in fact seems to be an effort to raise this stale issue after the petitioner has come to know the order of the Division Bench as well as learned Single Judge in the case of Ramanuj Chaurasia (supra) and Mahendra Yadav (supra), which as noted above were disposed of way back on 16.1.2014 and 5.12.2014. As a matter of fact none of the two cases in fact were in respect of the persons whose appointment was made and cancelled, rather they were claiming their appointment on the basis of their qualification acquired from Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow and thus, whatever was observed by way of giving them liberty to file a representation either by the Division Bench or the learned Single Judge in the aforesaid two cases will have hardly any application, especially when this Court finds that the order of termination of service of the petitioner is based on the Government direction issued by the Director, Primary Educsation contained in his letter no. 332 dated 15.5.2012.
35. As a matter of fact it does not appear that the attention of this Court was drawn to the aforesaid Government decision dated 15.5.2012 in respect of the decision regarding qualification of Teachers Training from Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow to be invalid in terms of the qualification Patna High Court CWJC No.14180 of 2015 (2) dt.08-09-2015 50 prescribed under the Rules and Advertisement. This Court, therefore, does not find any justification to give any liberty to the petitioner to file a representation with regard to his validity of his qualification of Teachers Training, especially when that would amount to giving life to a stale claim, inasmuch as the petitioner himself has moved this Court after 2½ years of his termination.
36. Thus, for the reasons indicated above, this application must fail and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) surendra/-
U