Munni Yadav Wife Of Shri Sudev ... vs The State Of Jharkhand Through ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3593 Jhar

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                            W.P.(S) No. 3038 of 2022
                                      ----

Munni Yadav wife of Shri Sudev Yadav, resident of Village Sonpura, P.O. Selhara, P.S. Chouparan, Hazaribagh.

                                                 ...     Petitioner

                                        -versus-

1. The State of Jharkhand through Principal Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy Development, Government of Jharkhand, Dhurva, Ranchi.

2. The Director, Primary Education, Department of School Education and Literacy Development, Government of Jharkhand, Dhurva, Ranchi.

3. The Deputy Commissioner-cum-President, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Hazaribagh.

4. The District Education Officer cum Block Education Officer, Hazaribagh.

5. The District Superintendent of Education cum Additional District Programme Officer, Jharkhand Shiksha Abhiyan, Hazaribagh.

6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Chouparan, Hazaribagh.

                                                      ...     Respondents
                                           ----

                CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
                                            ----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Arpit Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Piyushita Meha Tudu, A.C. to AAG IV

----

3/ 08.09.2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 18.11.2020, whereby the District Superintendent of Education has stopped the honorarium of the petitioner till the educational certificates of the petitioner are verified and appropriate order is passed. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner passed matriculation from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad in the year 1999 and was employed as Para Teacher. A complaint was received by the authority that Hindi Sahitya Sammelan did not have the power to issue the certificate, thus, the certificate on which the petitioner sought employment, was not valid. On receipt of the complaint, authority initiated enquiry and directed the petitioner to submit his educational certificates, which the petitioner deposited. Respondents-State has not taken any final decision nor arrived at a conclusion. The petitioner's case is that the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan had power to issue certificate till 26.10.2010, as the recognition to Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad was granted up to 26.10.2010. Thereafter, no further extension was granted. Since the petitioner had obtained the said qualification

in the year 1999, i.e., during the period the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan was recognised, it cannot be said that the educational certificate obtained by the petitioner is not genuine.

3. After going through the petition and hearing the parties, since respondents agreed to take final decision, I direct the Director, Primary Education, Department of School Education and Literacy Department (respondent No.2) to take a final decision and communicate the same to the petitioner. If it is found that the certificate of the petitioner has been issued by a recognized institute on the date of issuance of the certificate, he will be immediately allowed to join and all his pending dues should be disbursed. The decision should be taken by the respondents within 8 (eight) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with a representation of the petitioner. It will be open to the petitioner to bring to the notice of the authority, the judgments and decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this High Court, which covers the issue.

4. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

(Ananda Sen, J.) Kumar/Cp-02