Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Ainkumari Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 1 August, 2022
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 4840 of 2015
• Smt. Ainkumari Sahu W/o Shri Hitesh Kumar Sahu, Aged About 33 Years R/o
Kurud, Village Kurud, Tahsil Chhura, Police Station Panduka, District
Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat Department,
Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh,
Chhattisgarh
2. The Commissioner, Raipur Division, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District :
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. The Collector, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, District :
Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh
4. The Janpad Panchayat, Mainpur, Through The Chief Executive Officer,
Mainpur, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, District : Gariyabandh,
Chhattisgarh
5. Dhrurvagudi Primary School, Janpad Panchayat Mainpur, Through The Head
Master, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondents
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For petitioner : Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate.
For Respondent/State : Mr. Hamida Siddiqui, Dy.A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas.
Order on Board
(1-8-2022)
1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the
petitioner assailing the impugned order dated 18-11-2015 passed by the
respondent No.2 (Annexure P/1) whereby the service of the petitioner
has been terminated on the ground that the petitioner is not entitled for
teaching experience of 12 marks for teaching in Government Middle
School Kurud.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the
petitioner was working in the Government Midele School, Kurud as
voluntary teacher and she has three years experience, therefore, on the
basis of this experience, she was appointed on the post of Shiksha
Karmi Grade III and subsequently her appointment was cancelled
vide order dated 10-12-2008 (Annexure P/5), thereafter along with
petitioner the services of the other candidates have also been
cancelled.
3. Learned State counsel has filed their return in which they have
annexed the entire proceeding (Annexure R4/1) dated 6-12-2008
wherein the reason for cancellation of the candidatures of the
petitioner and others has been mentioned in the order, the name of
the petitioner is at Serial No.56 wherein it has been stated that the
petitioner has done teaching job in the Government School, therefore,
her experience cannot be considered, as such she is not entitled to
get any marks.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this court
towards memo issued by the Joint Secretary, Government of
Chhattisgbarh, Panchayat and Gramin Rural Development
Department dated 22-8-2007 wherein it has been stated that as per
Clause (1)(b) of sub rule (9) of Rule 5 of Chhattisgarh Panchayat
Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Services) Rules 1997
(for short, "the Rules 1997") if any person has worked in Shiksha
Guarantee Scheme Centre, Janbhagidhari Schools, Alternative
Schools, Non-formal education centre, cent-percent aided State
Government and in village schools recognised by the Janpad
Pancahyat & District Panchayat, then he/she is entitled to get
marks of experience, but in the same letter, it is also directed by the
Joint Secretary of the School Department to grant benefit of one
person.
5. Hon'ble Division Bench of this court taking note of the facts vide its
order dated 5-7-2019 passed in Writ Appeal No. 126 of 2016 (Sheikh
Imamuddin vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) has observed in
paras 4, 5, 7 and 8 which read as under.
"4. On the basis of above facts and
circumstances of case, learned counsel for
the appellant submits that as the writ Court
has already taken a view and directed the
competent authority ie., Chief
Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat to consider
Rule 9(1)(b) of the Rules 1997 &
communication dated 20-2-2007 and to take
final decision as to whether candidates who
have acquired experience certificate from
DPEP are entitled for additional marks
towards experience or not, the appellant is
also entitled for the same relief and therefore,
he prays that this appeal may also be
disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the State submits that as the matter is to be
considered by competent authority with
respect to award of additional marks towards
experience in accordance with Rule ((1)(b) of
the Rules 1997, therefore, at this stage, he
has no objection, if the prayer made on behalf
of the appellant is allowed.
7.Perusal of experience certificate which is
part of Annexure A-3 to writ appeal, reveals
that the same has been issued under the seal
& signature of Headmaster and also certified
by the Block Education Officer concerned. As
per this certificate, appellant has worked as
'teacher' in Government Primary School,
Mainpur from 1-10-02 to 30-4-2005. As
before the writ court cases of number of
petitioners having different grounds of
challenge were taken together and from
perusal of the order it appears that specific
ground whether marks towards experience on
the basis of experience certificate issued by a
government primary school could not be
considered, therefore, in the light of
communication/letter dated 20-7-2007 issued
by the State Government and subsequent
orders passed by writ court in writ petitions
including in WPS No.1778/2017, we are of
the considered view that the matter requires
consideration at the end of competent
authority ie.., Chief Executive Officer, Janpad
Panchayat Mainpur.
8.In view of above, writ appeal is allowed,
orders impugned are set aside and the matter
is remanded back to Chief Executive Officer,
Janpad Panchayat Mainpur for taking
decision afresh in respect of grant of
additional marks against teaching experience
certificate issued a government primary
school (DPEP) in the light of letter dated 20-
7-2007 (part of Annexure P/17) issued by the
State Government and contents of Rule
9(10(b) of the Rules 1997 and also
considering the genuineness of certificates
enclosed with application. This exercise
shall be done within two months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order".
6. In the light of judgment of Hon'ble Division Bench of this court in Wrti
Appeal No. 126 of 2016 decided on 5-7-2019, it is directed that the
Chief Executive Officer shall examine the case of the petitioner in
terms of the order passed by Hon'ble Divison Bench of this court as
also the memo dated 20-7-2007 issued by the Joint Secretary, State
of Chhattisgarh and if the case of the petitioner is similarly situated to
other employees who have been granted benefit, her case also
should be considered for appointment as Shiksha Karmi. It is further
directed that the Chief Executive Officer shall carry out the verification
proceeding within an outer limit of two months from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order.
7. In view of what has been discussed above, the writ petition is allowed.
The impugned order dated 18-11-2015 (Annexure P/1) passed by the
Commissioner as well as the order dated 10-12-2008 (Annexure P/5)
and the order dated 25-7-2015 (Annexure P/8) passed by the
Collector are set aside.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
JUDGE
Raju
