Jharkhand High Court
Mukund Marandi vs The Secretary on 16 June, 2022
Author: Ravi Ranjan
Bench: Chief Justice, Sujit Narayan Prasad
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 736 of 2017
----
Mukund Marandi, S/O Late Kalidas Marandi, Sub
Inspector of School, Nagarpalika, Madaninagar, P.O. P.S.
Plamu, District-Palamu, at present residing at Vill-Bash
Paharhi, P.O.-Bakudih P.S.-Narayanpur Via-Jamtarha,
District-Jamtarha. . ... ... Petitioners
Versus
1.The Secretary, School Education & Literacy Department
(Primary Education), Government of Jharkhand, M.D.I.
Building, Dhurwa, P.O. P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi.
2.State Education Establishment (Primary Education)
through its Chairman, the Director (Primary Education),
M.D.I. Building, P.O. P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi.
3.The Director, Primary Education, School Education &
Literacy Department M.D.I. Building, Dhurwa, P.O. P.S.
Dhurwa, District-Ranchi.
4.The Regional deuty Director of Education, Palamu
Division, Palamu, P.O. P.S. Palamu, District-Palamu
5.District Superintendent of Education, Palamu, P.O. P.S.
Palamu, District-Palamu. ... ... Respondents
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Sanjit Kumar, Advocate
For the Resp. State : Mrs. Darshana Poddar Mishra, AAG-I
--------
ORAL JUDGMENT
Order No. 7: Dated 16th June, 2022 The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing order as contained in Memo No. 950 (Legal) dated 30.12.2016 -2- issued under the signature of Director, Primary Education (respondent no. 3) by which the petitioner was reverted from the Subordinate Education Service to Lower Subordinate Education Service; and for direction upon the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue against the post of Subordinate Education Service, on which the petitioner was promoted.
2. The brief facts of the case, as per pleadings made in the writ petition, which require to be enumerated reads as hereunder:
The petitioner was appointed in Lower Subordinate Education Service in March, 1991 as Assistant Teacher in Government Basic School, Kendua, Dumka. At the time of appointment, he was matriculation and passed Intermediate in the year 1993. He obtained the degree of Sahityalankar in the year 1997, which is stated to be equivalent to Graduation. Thereafter, he was promoted in the Subordinate Education Service w.e.f. 11.10.2003. Accordingly, he joined as Lecturer in Primary Teacher Training College, Padiya in term of order as contained in Memo No. 2495 dated 26.07.2005. At present, he is posted as School Sub Inspector, Nagarpalika, Palamu and he has been completed more than 12 years in Subordinate Education Service.-3-
It has further been submitted that the Director, Primary Education issued another order vide Memo No. 725 dated 13.02.2007 promoting 36 persons against the post of Subordinate Education Service, in which, several persons have the requisite qualification of Sahityalankar, which is equivalent to Graduation degree. Thereafter, vide order as contained in Memo No. 394 dated 23.02.2011 several persons who have requisite qualification of Sahityalankar were promoted against the post of Subordinate Education Service.
Being aggrieved with such promotion, some persons approached the writ Court by filing two writ petitions being W.P. (S) Nos. 770 of 2003 and 6100 of 2003 challenging letter no. 6063 dated 03.11.2003. The writ petitions was disposed of vide order dated 19th September, 2014 holding that the qualification of Sahityalankar cannot be treated equivalent to graduation or Bachelor of Arts Degree for the purposes of claiming any benefit of promotion to the post of Subordinate Education Service by the private respondents, as such any promotion granted on the basis of such qualification to the private respondents has to go. It was further held that order of promotion based on such claim of qualification of Sahiytalankar cannot be held to be legal and valid and any promotion granted pursuant to order -4- dated 26.07.2005 to the private respondents cannot be sustained in the eye of law and is accordingly quashed.
Pursuant thereto, vide letter no. 783 (Legal) dated 03.10.2016, the petitioner was served with show cause notice to which he replied, but the respondent-Director, Primary Education without taking note of the fact as given in show cause reply reverted the petitioner from the Subordinate Education Service to Lower Subordinate Education Service vide Memo No. 950 (Legal) dated 30.12.2016 issued under the signature of Director, Primary Education (respondent no. 3).
Being aggrieved with the order of reversal, the petitioner approached this Court invoking the power conferred to the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in batch of writ petitions, being W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 and analogous cases, the petitioners challenged notification/order dated 26.02.2015 and 01.06.2015, which was disposed of vide order dated 10.05.2022 in terms of order passed by the Full Bench of the Patna High Court in the case of Ramashankar Patel & Ors Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. [Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11255 of 2016 and Civil Writ -5- Jurisdiction Case No. 3828 of 2015], by which, the degree of 'Praveshika' 'Sahitya Bhushan' and 'Sahitya Alankar' issued by the Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar has been held valid up-to 26.02.2015.
It has further been submitted that in the cases in hand, the promotion of the petitioner has been reverted from the Subordinate Education Service to Lower Subordinate Education Service de-recognizing the degree of Sahityalankar, which has been validated by this Court vide judgment dated 10.05.2022 rendered in W.P. (C) No. 3115 of 2015 and analogous cases. Therefore, prayer has been made that the instant writ petitions may also be disposed of in terms of order passed in W.P. (C) No. 3115 of 2015 and analogous cases.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State does not dispute the fact that W.P. (C) No. 3115 of 2015 and analogous cases have been disposed of vide judgment dated 10.05.2022.
5. In view of specific submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court deems it fit and proper to dispose of the present case in terms of order dated 10.05.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3115 of 2015 and analogous cases.
-6-
6. Accordingly, this Court holds that the degree of 'Praveshika' 'Sahitya Bhushan' and 'Sahitya Alankar are valid up-to 26.02.2015.
7. In consequence thereof, order as contained in Memo No. 950 (Legal) dated 30.12.2016 issued under the signature of Director, Primary Education (respondent no. 3) by which the petitioner was reverted from the Subordinate Education Service to Lower Subordinate Education Service, is quashed and set aside so far present petitioner is concerned.
The petitioner is directed to approach before the respondents-authorities within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order by filing fresh representation along with copy of order passed in this case as also in W.P. (C) No. 3115 of 2015 and analogous cases.
Upon receipt/production of such representation, the respondents-authorities shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law and on examining the facts of the writ petitioner preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
Needless to say that if the writ petitioner is found eligible, allow the petitioner to continue against the post of Subordinate Education Service, on which the petitioner -7- was promoted, within further period of three months from the date of such decision.
However, in case of any adverse decision, the same shall be communicated to the individual petitioner within the aforesaid period.
8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stand allowed to the aforesaid extent.
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, C.J.) (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Alankar/ A.F.R.