Patna High Court
Sanjay Kumar vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 29 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19833 of 2018
======================================================
Sanjay Kumar S/o Kishori Mandal R/o Vill-Hakpara, P.O.-Nand Lali, P.S.-
Saharsa, Dist-Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Director, Primary Education Directorate, Bihar, Patna
3. The District Education Officer, Supaul
4. The District Programme Officer Estt., Supaul
5. The Block Education Officer, Kishanpur, Supaul
6. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Kishanpur South, District-Supaul
7. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Kishanpur South, District-
Supaul
8. The Member District Teacher Appellate Authority, Supaul
9. The State Appellate Authority, Niyojan Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna through
its Secretary
10. Basant Kumar S/o Late Maheshwar Mandal R/o At and P.O. Kaushlipatti,
P.S.-Pipra, District-Supaul
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Roy 1 -Sc13
For the respondent no. 10 : Mr. Girijanand Prasad, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-11-2021
1. Heard Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, the learned
counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy No. 1 for
the State and Mr. Girijanand Prasad for private respondent
no. 10.
2. The respondent no.10 was appointed as a
Panchayat Teacher but when it was found that his degree
Patna High Court CWJC No.19833 of 2018 dt.29-11-2021
was forged, necessary enquiry was made regarding the
same.
3. The District Teacher Employment Appellate
Authority, Supaul found that respondent no. 10 was not
entitled to be appointed and, therefore, validated the
appointment of the petitioner on such post on which he was
appointed after the appointment of the respondent no. 10
was annulled.
4. The petitioner is a candidate of B.C. category
and was placed second in the merit list.
5. The aforesaid order of the District Teacher
Employment Appellate Authority, Supaul was challenged by
the respondent no. 10 before the State Appellate Authority
which ultimately declared the certificate of the respondent
no. 10 to be genuine and directed the authorities to re-
instate him in service.
6. Hence, this writ petition.
7. A perusal of the counter affidavit filed on behalf
of the official respondents indicates that the respondent no.
10 had made a request that his training certificate should be
Patna High Court CWJC No.19833 of 2018 dt.29-11-2021
verified from Bihar School Examination Board. Acceding to
his request, the certificate was again sent for verification
before the Board and it was reported that the matriculation
certificate of respondent no. 10 was genuine but the
certificate of his having passed the Teachers Training
Examination was incorrect as there was tampering in the
certificate.
8. Since this report was different from the report
which was earlier submitted by the D.E.O., who had also
submitted his report after verification of the records from the
Bihar School Examination Board, the District Programme
Officer (Establishment), Supaul thought it appropriate that
the certificate of respondent no. 10 be again verified from
the Bihar School Examination Board by deputing another
officer, namely, Shri Shiv Dayal Prasad, who was the then
Programme Officer (Establishment), Supaul.
9. The aforesaid officer visited the office of the
Bihar School Examination Board and got the certificates of
the respondent no. 10 verified from the records and again
submitted his report on 17.06.2014, stating that the
Patna High Court CWJC No.19833 of 2018 dt.29-11-2021
matriculation certificate of the respondent no. 10 was correct
but the training certificate was fake as the roll number
provided in such certificate belonged to another candidate
and not the respondent no. 10.
10. These facts were not made known to the State
Appellate Authority and, therefore, the State Appellate
Authority passed an order in favour of the respondent no.
10.
11. It appears from the counter affidavit filed by the
respondent no. 10 that only the report which was initially
furnished regarding the correctness of the certificate of the
respondent no. 10 was placed before the State Appellate
Authority for his consideration.
12. This being the situation, this Court is left with no
other option but to set aside the appellate order and remand
the case back to the State Appellate Authority for passing a
fresh order after hearing both the parties and on perusing
the report regarding the genuineness of the certificate of the
respondent no. 10 as well as the claim of the petitioner.
13. The State Appellate Authority is requested to
Patna High Court CWJC No.19833 of 2018 dt.29-11-2021
pass a final order within a period of three months from the
date of receipt / production of a copy of this order.
14. Till such time, status quo shall be maintained.
15. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J)
sunilkumar/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 02.12.2021
Transmission Date N/A
