Jharkhand High Court
Ayesha Kumar vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 26 October, 2010
Author: R.R. Prasad
Bench: R.R. Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 547 of 2009
Ayesha Kumar ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and others ... ... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. S.K. Pandey, Advocate
For the State : J.C. to G.P.-II
-----
5/26.10.2010Heard the parties.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as head-mistress In-charge in Tikait Umraon Singh Sheikh Bhikhari Balika High School, Ormanjhi by the Managing Committee of the school on 8.12.1980. Subsequently, under the Project School Scheme, the school was taken over as project school w.e.f. 1.1.1982. In course of time, decision was taken by the then State of Bihar that the service condition of the teacher of the Project School would be the same as that of the teacher of the Nationalized School, whereunder one of the conditions was that the services of the teacher/head mistress/head master would be regularized on completion of 7 years reconning from the date of taking over the school.
When that decision was not given effect to, some of the teachers/head-master filed writ application before the Patna High Court for regularization of their services, but that writ application was dismissed and as against that, the aggrieved person preferred an S.L.P. before the Supreme Court vide Civil Appeal No. 4032/1988 (A.K. Pradhan Vs. State of Bihar and others). The Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the State of Bihar to regularize the services of the In-charge head master with effect from completion of 7 years of service reconing from the date which the Institution was taken over by the Government.
In the light of the said decision, the petitioner made a representation before the Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Development, Ranchi, but the claim of the petitioner for regularization of her services as head mistress was rejected.
A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State, wherein it has been stated that the decision rendered in the case of A.K. Pradhan (supra) is not applicable so far as the case of the petitioner is concerned, as she happens to be the In-charge head mistress in a project school, whereas decision was rendered in the case of the teacher/ In-charge head mistress of the nationalized government school and, therefore, the claim of the petitioner for regularization has rightly been rejected.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it does appear that the petitioner has been In-charge head-mistress in a project school namely, Tikait Umraon Singh Sheikh Bhikhari Balika High School, Ormanjhi, since 8.12.1980 i.e. much before taking over of the school as project school. It further appears that the service condition of a teacher of a Project School was made at par with the teacher of a nationalized secondary school by the State of Bihar vide Notification dated 1.6.1999 and in that view of the matter, if the petitioner has completed 7 years of service from the date of taking over of the said project school, she is entitled to be regularized on the post of head mistress. Similar issue did crop up in the case of Shri Sarayu Prasad Roy Vs. State of Bihar and others (C.W.J.C. No. 11805 of 1993(P) and also in a case of Kamdeo Prasad Shahi Vs. State of Jharkhand and others (W.P. (S) No. 2700 of 2006), whereby this Court by rejecting the stand of the State, which was similar as in this case, directed the Authority to regularize the services of the petitioner on the post of head-master.
It was pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner that against the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11805 of 1993(P), the State had preferred an L.P.A. which got dismissed and thereupon the services of the petitioner-Shri Sarayu Prasad Roy has been regularized.
In view of the facts and circumstances, Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Development, Ranchi (respondent no.
3) is directed to take decision in the matter of regularization of the services of the petitioner on the post of head mistress and also on the matter relating to the consequential benefit, which the petitioner is entitled to, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
Accordingly, this application stands allowed.
(R.R. Prasad, J.) AKT