Patna High Court
Pradip Kumar Yadav @ Pradeep Kumar Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 17 April, 2025
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17508 of 2021
======================================================
1. Pradip Kumar Yadav @ Pradeep Kumar Yadav Son of Yadu Nandan Yadav,
Resident of Village- Inarva, Ward No. 4, P.O.- Jogeshwar Sthan, P.S.-
Phulparas (Hulaspatti), District - Madhubani.
2. Rekha Kumari Daughter of Ram Bilash Yadav, Wife of Shashi Kapoor
Yadav, Resident of Village - Amaiya, P.S.- Manigachhi, District -
Darbhanga. At present Resident of Village- Jaughatta, Ward No. 14, P.O.-
Harsinghpur, P.S.- Bahera, District - Darbhanga.
3. Anu Priya Rani, Daughter of Binay Kumar Thakur, Wife of Ajay Kumar
Chaudhary, Resident of Village- Rampura Ward No. 1, P.S.- Singwara,
District - Darbhanga.
4. Rambha Kumari, Daughter of Lal Bahadur Singh, Wife of Sanoj Kumar,
Resident of Village- Pura, Ward No. 6, P.O.- Kawaria, P.S.- Sadar, District -
Darbhanga.
5. Lalita Kumari, Daughter of Ram Eqbal Singh, Wife of Late Amrendra
Kumar, Resident of Village- Thakur Konha, P.S.- Runi Saidpur, District -
Darbhanga, at present Resident of Village - Vishwanath Patti, Ward No. 14,
P.O.- Bharwara, P.S.- Singwara, District - Darbhanga.
6. Chaudhary Ram Kumar Rai, Son of Chaudhary Deo Chandra Rai, Resident
of Village- Batho, P.S. Bahera, District - Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Education Deptt., Bihar,
Patna.
2. The District Education Officer, Darbhanga.
3. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Darbhanga.
4. The Block Education Officer, Darbhanga.
5. The Presiding Officer (Judicial), District Appellate Authority, Darbhanga.
6. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj- Khaira, Block - Bahadurpur, District -
Darbhanga.
7. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj- Khaira, Block - Bahadupur,
District - Darbhanga.
8. Siya Sharan Yadav, Son of Surya Narayan Yadav, Resident of Village-
Nadikat Diwari, P.O.- Kabariya, P.S. Sadar Darbhanga, District - Darbhanga.
9. Jagatpati Thakur, Son of Siyaram Thakur, Resident of Village and P.O.-
Punhad, P.S.- Ghanshyampur, District - Darbhanga.
10. Rajesh Kumar Jha, Son of Ganesh Jha, Resident of Village - Mahinam, P.S.-
Bahera, District - Darbhanga.
11. Ashok Kumar Amar, Son of Kishori Prasad Rai, Resident of Village -
Diwari, P.S.- Sadar, District - Darbhanga.
12. Santosh Kumar Jha, Son of Arun Kumar Jha, Resident of Village- Kasraura,
P.S.- Ghanshyampur, District - Darbhanga.
Patna High Court CWJC No.17508 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
2/8
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17406 of 2021
======================================================
1. Pradip Kumar Yadav @ Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Son of Yadu Nandan Yadav,
Resident of Village-Inarva, Ward No. 4, P.O.-Jogeshwar Sthan, P.S.-
Phulparas (Hulaspatti), District-Madhubani.
2. Rekha Kumari, Daughter of Ram Bilash Yadav, Wife of Shashi Kapoor
Yadav, Resident of Village-Amaiya, P.S.-Manigacchi, District-Darbhanga, at
present Resident of Village-Jaughatta, Ward No. 14, P.O.-Harsinghpur, P.S.-
Bahera, District-Darbhanga.
3. Anu Priya Rani, Daughter of Binay Kumar Thakur, Wife of Ajay Kumar
Chaudhary, Resident of Village-Rampura, Ward No. 1, P.S. Singwara,
District-Darbhanga.
4. Rambha Kumari, Daughter of Lal Bahadur Singh, Wife of Sanoj Kumar,
Resident of Village-Pura, Ward No. 6, P.O.-Kawaria, P.S.-Sadar, District-
Darbhanga.
5. Lalita Kumari, Daughter of Ram Eqbal Singh, Wife of Late Amrendra
Kumar, Resident of Village-Thakur Konha, P.S. Runi Saidpur, District-
Darbhanga, at Present Resident of Village-Vishwanath Patti, Ward No. 14,
P.O. Bharwara, P.S. Singwara, District-Darbhanga.
6. Choudhary Ram Kumar Rai, Son of Chaudhary Deo Chandra Rai, Resident
of Village-Batho, P.S.-Bahera, District-Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Block Education Officer, Bahadurpur, District-Darbhanga namely
Kamaldeo Panjiyar, son of Ram Chaudhar Panjiyar, Resident of Village-
Bara, P.O. and P.S.-Seharghat, District-Darbhanga.
2. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Khaira, Block-Bahadurpur,
District-Darbhanga.
3. Jagatpati Thakur, son of Siyaram Thakur, Resident of Village and P.O.-
Punhad, P.S.-Ghanshyampur, District-Darbhanga.
4. Rajesh Kumar Jha, son of Ganesh Jha, Resident of Village-Mahinam, P.S.-
Bahera, District-Darbhanga.
5. Ashok Kumar Amar, son of Kishori Prasad Rai, Resident of Village-Diwari,
P.S.-Sadar, District-Darbhanga.
6. Santosh Kumar Jha, son of Arun Kumar Jha, Resident of Village-Kasraura,
P.S.-Ghanshyampur, District-Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17508 of 2021)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Amish Kumar, Advocate
Patna High Court CWJC No.17508 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
3/8
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Hitesh Suman, (Ac to SC 13)
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17406 of 2021)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Amish Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kaushal Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 17-04-2025
Heard Mr. Mrigank Mauli, learned Senior Advocate
along with Mr. Amish Kumar, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners; Mr. Hitesh Suman, learned Ac to SC
13 for the State and Mr. Kaushal Kumar Jha, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the Respondent.
2. The petitioners in paragraph no. 1 of the present
writ petition have sought, inter alia, the following relief(s),
which is reproduced hereinafter:-
"(i) For quashing order dated 23.08.2021
passed in Appeal No 117 of 2019 and Appeal
No.124 of 2020 (Annexure-8) by the Chairman
(Administrative), State Appellate Authority.
Education Department, Bihar, Patna whereby
and where under he has allowed the Appeal filed
by the Respondent No. 8 and set aside the order
of the learned District Appellate Authority dated
15.12.2018
and all the 10 appointments
including that of the Petitioners (Panchayat
Teachers) has been cancelled. The concerned
Panchayat Sachiv has also been directed to
cancel all these appointment within a period of
15 days, other Respondents comprising District
Education Officer and Block Education Officer
are directed to ensure that the Panchayat Sachiv
complies with these orders of the Authority
within specified time. If needed, they will take
help of District Magistrate in this matter who
will cooperate with the District Education
Officer when he approaches the District
Magistrate in connection with compliance of this
order. With this order both the Appeals are
disposed of. No request has been made relating
to payment or it's realization. So, no orders are
being passed in this regard. Since, these
cancelled appointments were made after the cut-
Patna High Court CWJC No.17508 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
off date ordered by the State Government, no
orders are being passed for any further action in
the matter.
(ii) For direction to the respondents concerned
not to implement the direction issued in order
dated 23.08.2021 passed in Appeal No. 117 of
2019 and Appeal No.124 of 2020 (Annexure-8)
during the pendency of the instant writ
application.
(iii) For direction to the respondents concerned
to allow the petitioners to discharge their duties
without any interruption on the post of
Panchayat Teacher in their respective schools."
3. At the outset, learned Senior advocate appearing on
behalf of petitioners submitted that the order dated 23.08.2021
passed by the State Appellate Authority in Appeal No.117 of
2019 (Annexure 8) with respect to petitioners of CWJC
No.17508 of 2021 and in Appeal No.124 of 2020 with respect to
petitioners of CWJC No.17406 of 2021 are not sustainable, as
the same have been passed by the Officer of Indian
Administrative Service. The Tribunal quorum provided under
Rule 4(3) of the Bihar State School Teachers and Employees
Disputes Redressal Rules, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the
'Rules, 2015') has not been fulfilled. Learned Senior Advocate
has relied upon a judgment dated 23.05.2025 passed in CWJC
no.7081 of 2021 (Vidyasagar Kushwaha & Anr. vs. The State
of Bihar and Ors.) by this Court.
4. I find that the State Appellate Authority consists of
a quorum as per the provision of Rule 4(3) of the Rules, 2015 ,
which is reproduced hereinafter:
Patna High Court CWJC No.17508 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
"4(3). The State Appellate
Authority shall be constituted at State
level consisting of two persons only
(hereinafter each referred as the
separate chairperson) who will be
appointed by the State Government for
hearing the appeal against the order
passed by the District Appellate
Authorities. One chairperson will be a
retired Justice of Hon'ble High Court
and another will be a retired officer of
Indian Administrative Service not below
the rank of Principal Secretary. The
State Government may authorise the
Chairperson of one State Appellate
Authority to discharge the functions of
the Chairperson of another State
Appellate Authority."
5. Now the question arises, whether the Chairperson,
who has passed the order, has been appointed in accordance
with the provisions of Rule 4(3) of the Rules, 2015? The
aforesaid statutory Rule binds the State Government to
constitute a State Appellate Authority, consisting of two persons,
out of which Chairperson shall be a retired judge of the Hon'ble
High Court and another person shall be a retired officer of
Indian Administrative Service, not below the rank of Principal
Secretary. In the present case, order has been passed by the
Chairperson, who is not retired justice of the Hon'ble High
Court, but he is an officer of the Indian Administrative Service. I
find that the aforesaid order dated 23.08.2021 cannot be
sustained for two reasons, firstly absence of quorum as
provided under Rule 4(3) of the Rules, 2015 and secondly the
Chairperson can only be a retired Judge of the Hon'ble High
Patna High Court CWJC No.17508 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
Court. The Rule 4(3) of the Rules, 2015 is also supported by the
decision of the Apex Court, in case of State of Gujarat Vs.
Utility Welfare Association reported in (2018) 6 SCC 21 : 2018
SCC OnLine SC 368, wherein, in paragraph nos.117 and 118,
the following order has been passed, which, inter alia, is as
follows:-
"117. In Madras Bar Assn. [Madras Bar Assn.
v.Union of India, (2014) 10 SCC 1] (MJ-II), the
Constitution Bench, referring to the decision in
Madras Bar Assn. [Union of India v. Madras Bar
Assn., (2010) 11 SCC 1] (MJ-I) observed that
members of tribunals discharging judicial
functions could only be drawn from sources
possessed of expertise in law and competent to
discharge judicial functions. We are conscious of
the fact that the case (MJ-I) dealt with a factual
matrix where the powers vested in courts were
sought to be transferred to the tribunal, but what
is relevant is the aspect of judicial functions with
all the "trappings of the court" and exercise of
judicial power, at least, in respect of same part of
the functioning of the State Commission. Thus, if
the Chairman of the Commission is not a man of
law, there should, at least, be a member who is
drawn from the legal field. The observations of
the Constitution Bench in Madras Bar Assn.
[Madras Bar Assn. v. Union of India, (2014) 10
SCC 1] (MJ-II) constitute a declaration on the
concept of basic structure with reference to the
concepts of "separation of powers", "rule of
law" and "judicial review". The first question
raised before the Constitution Bench as to
whether judicial review was part of the basic
structure of the Constitution was, thus, answered
in the affirmative.
118. We are, thus, of the view that it is mandatory
to have a person of law, as a member of the State
Commission. When we say so, it does not imply
that any person from the field of law can be
picked up. It has to be a person, who is, or has
been holding a judicial office or is a person
possessing professional qualifications with
substantial experience in the practice of law,
who has the requisite qualifications to have been
appointed as a Judge of the High Court or a
District Judge."
Patna High Court CWJC No.17508 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
Any person, from the field of law or holding the law
degree, cannot hold the post of Chairperson, who don't possess
qualification to have been appointed as judge of the High Court
or the District Court.
6. Taking note of the above facts and discussion made
hereinabove and law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of
State of Gujarat (Supra), the impugned order dated 23.08.2021
passed by the Chairperson of the State Appellate Authority can
only be held to be without jurisdiction and as such, the same is
hereby set-aside and quashed. In view of the
direction/observation contained in order dated 25.03.2025
passed in CWJC No.7081 of 2021, corrective measures in
accordance with law, as per the provision of Rules, 2015 is
required to be taken by the Sate Government.
7. The matter is remitted back to the State Appellate
Authority. The Chairman of the State Appellate Authority
having jurisdiction must ensure to dispose of the appeal
expeditiously, in accordance with law without being prejudiced
by the order dated dated 23.08.2021 passed by the State
Appellate Authority in Appeal No.117 of 2019 (Annexure 8)
with respect to petitioners of CWJC No.17508 of 2021 and in
Appeal No.124 of 2020 with respect to petitioners of CWJC
Patna High Court CWJC No.17508 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
No.17406 of 2021.
8. The petitioners should not be allowed to suffer as a
result of order without jurisdiction.
9. Accordingly, the present writ applications stand
disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 18.04.2025
Transmission Date NA
