Indrajeet Prasad Hemanshu vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1254 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21397 of 2018
     ======================================================

1. Nirmal Kumar and Ors Son of Anup Lal Yadav Resident of village-Sishwa, P.O.-Mojampatti, P.S.-Barhara Kothi, District-Purnea.

2. Birendra Kumar Son of Anandi Prasad Yadav Resident of village-Sishwa, P.O.-Mojampatti, P.S.-Barhara Kothi, District-Purnea.

3. Visheshwar Singh Son of Ram Dev Singh Resident of villageP.O.-

Sarmastpur, Via-Vasudevpur Chandel, P.S.-Mahnar, District-Vaishali- 844501.

4. Raj Kumar Yadav Son of Fauchai Yadav Resident of village-Sishwa, P.O.-

Mojampatti, P.S.-Barhara Kothi, District-Purnea.

5. Amrendra Prasad Yadav Son of Dallu Prasad Yadav Resident of village-

Sishwa, P.O.-Mojampatti, P.S.-Barhara Kothi, District-Purnea.

6. Ramesh Prasad Yadav Son of Jagdish Prasad Yadav Resident of village-

Jankinagar, P.O. and P.S.-Jankinagar, District-Purnea.

7. Vidyanand Yadav Son of Vindeshwari Prasad Yadav Resident of villageP.O.

and P.S.-Rupauli, District-Purnea.

8. Ayodhya Prasad Yadav Son of Mohan Prasad Yadav Resident of village-

Batauna, P.O.-Godhaila, P.S. and District-Madhepura.

9. Upendra Prasad Yadav Son of Parmeshwari Prasad Yadav Resident of village-Harerampur, P.O.-Mirchaibari, P.S.-Jankinagar, Via-Murliganj, District-Purnea.

10. Kusheshwar Prasad Yadav Son of Late Ganga Prasad Yadav Resident of village-Harerampur, P.O.-Mirchaibari, P.S.-Jankinagar, Via-Murliganj, District-Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director, Primary Education, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. Deputy Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. District Magistrate, Purnea.

5. District Education Officer, Purnea.

6. District Programme Officer, Establishment Purnea.

7. Block Education Officer, Barhara Kothi, Purnea

8. Block Education Officer, Banmankhi, Purnea

9. Block Education Officer, Rupauli, Purnea.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7066 of 2018

====================================================== Indrajeet Prasad Hemanshu Son of Late Narshing Rai, resident of Village- Barahi, P.S.- Udakishunganj, District- Madhepura, at present posted as Asst. Teacher, Girls Middle School, Baghawa, District- Purnia.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Principle Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director Primary Education, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Education Officer, Purnia, District- Purnia.

5. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Purnia, District- Purnia.

6. The Block Education Officer, Dhamdaha, District- Purnea.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

with

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 22833 of 2018

====================================================== Ajay Kumar son of Sri Vidyanand Yadav resident of Village- Sishwa, P.O.- Mojampatti, P.S. Barhara Kothi, District Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. Deputy Secretary, Education Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. District Magistrate Purnea.

5. District Education Officer Purnea.

6. District Programme Officer Establishment Purnea.

7. Block Education Officer, Barhara Kothi Purnea.

8. Block Education Officer, Banmankhi Purnea. Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

9. Block Education Officer Purnea.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 21397 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Adv.

Mr.Pranav Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr.Madanjeet Kumar -Gp20 (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7066 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sharda Nand Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt.Binita Singh -Sc28 (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 22833 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashish Giri, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Prabhakar Jha

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 21-02-2022

All the writ petitions have come up for admission.

Taking into consideration the nature of the case, both the counsels

have agreed to argue the case finally. Accordingly, the case was

heard finally at this stage.

Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners

in CWJC No. 21397 of 2018 submits that the petitioners, who are

working as teachers had acquired their B.ed qualification in

between the year 1979-81 to 1986 from the Chhota Nagpur

Prathmik Sikchhak Sichha Mahavidyalaya, Ranchi.

The Education Department found certain discrepancies

upon inspection conducted of the said college and thereafter, Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

issued an order dated 30.09.1986 to de-recognise the said Teachers

Education College w.e.f. 30th September, 1986.

Learned counsel has further taken this Court to the said

order to submit that the college was dully recognized on 26 th

February, 1975 and continued to remain recognized till the order

was passed on 30th September, 1986.

Learned counsel submits that on account of de-

recognition and erroneous interpretation the petitioners' salary was

stopped. The petitioners, therefore, preferred a writ petition before

this Court and this Court in CWJC No. 3154 of 2018 vide its order

dated 9th March, 2018 directed the District Programme Officer

(Establishment), Purnea to conduct an enquiry and take a final

decision within a period of three months with liberty to the

petitioners to assail the order, if the same goes adverse to them.

The District Education Officer (Establishment), Purnea

vide its order dated 15th May, 2018 took an interpretation of order

dated 30.09.1986 to know that all the candidates, who had

acquired degree of education prior to 1986-88 from Chhota

Nagpur Prathmik Sikchhak Sichha Mahavidyalaya, Ranchi would

stand disqualified and accordingly the petitioners and other

similarly situated persons were held to be disqualified to continue

and their services were dispense with, with direction to recover the Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

salary. The petitioners have assailed the said order before this

Court.

Learned counsel submits that the order of de-recognition

dated 30th September, 1986 nowhere mentions of de-recognition

with retrospective effect. He further submits that the earlier

recognition order dated 26th February, 1975 was passed for further

Sessions 1975-76 and till further orders. Thus, all the students who

acquired degree qualification from the said college would be

eligible for appointment and their degrees cannot be said to be de-

recognised.

Learned counsel also taken to the order dated 16 th

September, 1988 to submit that even the State Government rebut

its order dated 30th September, 1986 and continued recognition of

the college for the Session 1986-88 temporarily. Thus, learned

Counsel submits that there was no occasion for the concerned

respondent to take a view that all the qualification prior to 1986-88

would stand de-recognise and prays to quash the order dated 15 th

May, 2018 with consequential benefits.

Learned counsel has also placed on record the letter to

show that similarly situated 07 other teachers have been continued

and have also been granted salary.

Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

Learned counsel submits that the termination order

essentially is retrospective in nature which cannot have been

passed.

Learned counsel appearing for the other two writ

petitions have also adopted the arguments of their senior counsel

and further in CWJC No. 22833 of 2018 learned counsel has

relied upon on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in Civil Appeal No. 178 of 2018 to show that candidates, who had

passed out from the Session 1985-87 were permitted to appear in

the examination also. The petitioner has passed out for the Session

1985-87 and he submits that as the order dated 30.09.1986 was

retrospectively modified to even allow candidates for the Sessions

1986-88 and given them provisional recognition, the petitioners

would be entitled to continue and the impugned order passed in his

case also deserves to be set aside.

Learned counsel appearing for the State has submitted

that as the recognition was cancelled vide order dated 30th

September, 1986, it would be assume that the college stood de-

recognised and all the qualifications which had been issued prior

to 1986 would also be treated as de-recognised and, therefore, he

supports the impugned order and submits that the order has rightly

been passed and the petitioners cannot be said to be eligible to Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

continue as teachers as they all passed the requisite qualification

from the said college for the various sessions prior to 1986 as

mentioned in the order dated 15th May, 2018.

I have considered the submissions. Recognition of

teachers training institute have been a subject matter of litigation

since long. This Court as well as the Hon'ble Apex Court has time

and again expressed that institutes should possess the requisite

infrastructure and qualified teachers for training the candidates

who acquire the qualification from that college. For the said

purpose, the N.C.T. E Act, 1993 has also come into force w.e.f.

1995. Prior to the Act come into force. The State Government at its

own level was conducting inspections for examining and satisfying

whether the institute is following minimum standards for the

education programme laid down for awarding the requisite degree

in B.ed.

The institute in the present case has acquired the

recognition from the State Government vide order dated 26 th

February, 1975. The recognition order reads as under:-

" la[;k& 3A oha -------------- A 74 f'k0 564 f'k{kk foHkkx] fcgkj A izs'kd] Jh izHkkr dkfUr pkS/kjh] ljdkj ds voj lfpo] fcgkj A lsok esa] Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

lfpo] vjktdh; izkFkfed f'k{kd] f'k{kk egkfo|ky;] MksjaMk @ Fkji[kuk] jkWaph A

iVuk] fnukad 26 Qjojh] 75 fo'k; %& izLohd`fr A egk'k;] funs'kkuqlkj dguk gS fd jkT; ljdkj us fu.kZ;kuqlkj vjktdh; izkFkfed f'k{kd f'k{kk egkfo|ky;] MksjaMk ,oa Fkji[kuk (jkWph) dh fuEukafdr 'kŸkkZs ij 75&76 l= ls vxys vkns'k rd dh izLohd`fr iznku dh tkrh gS %&

1) nksuksa izkFkfed f'k{kd f'k{kk egkfo|ky;] jkT;

ljdkj }kjk Lohd`r ikB~;Øeksa ds vuqlkj gh f'k{k.k dh O;oLFkk djsxhA

2) nksuksa egkfo|ky;ksa esa LVkfQax jktdh; izf'k{k.k egkfo|ky;ksa ds fy, LVkfQax iSVuZ ds vuqlkj gh gksxkA

3) fdlh Hkh ifjfLFkfr esa 100 izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa ls vf/kd dk ukekadu ugha gksxk A

4) Nk=kokl] lkt lTtk] miLdj] fo|ky; Hkou vkfn dh leqfpr O;oLFkk jgsxhA

5) egkfo|ky; dh izcU/k dkfj.kh lfefr dk leqfpr xBu gksxk] ftlesa jkT; ljdkj ds }kjk le; le; ij ,d euksuhr lnL; Hkh gksaxs rFkk iw.kZ lfefr dk vuqeksnu jkT; ljdkj djsxh A

6) le; le; ij jkT; ljdkj }kjk fn;s x;s funs'kksa dk ikyu djuk gksxkA jkT; ljdkj dks ;g vf/kdkj gksxk fd fdlh Hkh le; fo|ky;

dh izLohd`fr okil ys ysa A

fo'oklHkktu [email protected]& ¼ izHkkr dkfUr pkS/kjh ½ ljdkj ds voj lfpo] fcgkjA **

The aforesaid recognition order thus clearly postulates

that the institute shall remain recognised till further order. The next

order which has come on record is the order dated 30 th September, Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

1986, whereby the State Government after conducting inspection

found that the certain discrepancies with the institute and took a

decision to cancel the recognition.

It would be appropriate to note the order as under:-

"i=kad [email protected]&[email protected] ---------------

fcgkj ljdkj ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkxA izs"kd]

Jh mek'kadj izlkn] ljdkj ds la;qDr lfpo] ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkx] fcgkj] iVukA lsok esa] ftyk f'k{kk inkf/kdkjh] jkaphA iVuk] fnukad

fo"k; %& vjktdh; NksVkukxiqj izkFkfed f'k{kd f'k{kk egkfo|ky;

esu jksM] jkaph dh izLohd`fr ds laca/k esaA egk"k;]

mi;qZDr fo"k;d foHkkxh; i=kad & 1077] fnukad

30&09&86 ds izlax esa funs"kkuqlkj dguk gS fd ftlds }kjk vjktdh;

NksVkukxiqj izkFkfed f'k{kd f'k{kk egkfo|ky;] esujksM] jkaph dh

izLohd`fr jn dh xbZ Fkh ds laca/k esa iquZfopkj dj jkT; ljdkj }kjk bl

egkfo|ky; dks l= 1986&88 ls vLFkkbZ izLohd`fr iznku djus dk fu.kZ;

fy;k gSA fdlh Hkh ifjfLFkfr esa Nk=ksa dh la[;k ,d lkS ls vf/kd ugha

gksxkA

foHkkxh; vf/klwpuk la[;k& 1107 fnukad 25&11&87 esa

vafdr izLohd`fr dh 'krksZ rFkk vfu;ferrk dh tkap xfBr lfefr }kjk

djkdj izfrosnu ij vfUre fu.kZ; fy;k tk;sxkA Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

fo'oklHkktu] [email protected]&mek'kadj izlkn ljdkj ds la;qDr lfpoA Kkikad & 1082 iVuk] fnukad 16&9&88

izfrfyfi lfpo] fcgkj fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr fcgkj] iVuk rFkk

lfpo vjktdh; NksVkukxiqj izkFkfed f'k{kd f'k{kk egkfo|ky;] esu jksM]

jkaph dks lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d dk;kZFkZ izsf"krA

mek'kadj izlkn ljdkj ds la;qDr lfpoA "

Thus, the cancellation is w.e.f. 30th September, 1986. It

would, therefore, not affect the candidates, who have already

acquired the qualification between 1975-86. The order does not

say that all degrees granted earlier should stand de-recognised.

This Court further noticed that the order dated 30th September,

1986 stood withdrawn vide order dated 16.09.1988 as the State

Government reviewed its stand and recognised the degrees issued

by the college for the session 1986-88 also. Thus, this Court is

satisfied that the qualifications, which the petitioners acquired

stood and continued to remain recognise.

In the circumstances, there was no occasion for the

District Programme Officer (Establishment), Purnea to hold

otherwise he could not have added words for the order dated

30.09.1986 and terminate the services of the petitioners. The order

is thus found to be clearly contrary to law and also on facts. There

is no such declaration by the State to de-recognise the Patna High Court CWJC No.21397 of 2018 dt.21-02-2022

qualifications prior to 1986-88 acquired from Chhota Nagpur

Prathmik Sikchhak Sichha Mahavidyalaya, Ranchi.

The termination order is found to be illegal also as it has

been made retrospective no recovery could have been made.

In view thereof, the order dated 15.05.2018 is found to

be erroneous and is accordingly quashed and set aside.

In view of above, the petitioners would be entitled for

reinstatement with continuity of service and petitioners would also

be entitled for their salary for the entire period and other

consequential benefits, if any, vacancy has been made, the same

should be restored to the petitioners.

The respondents are directed to make compliance of the

order within a period of three months, failing which the petitioners

shall be free to initiate contempt proceeding without further notice.

The writ petitions are accordingly allowed.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) pravinkumar/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date
Transmission Date       25.02.2022