Patna High Court
Ramesh Mahto 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.16959 of 2021
======================================================
1. Ramesh Mahto S/o-Late Nirgun Mahto, R/o-Vill-Mamaura, P.O.-Dubauli,
P.S.-Panapur, District-Saran at Chapra.
2. Samita devi @ Ramita Devi, D/o-Bishwanath Rai, W/o-Rajesh Kumar, R/o-
Vill-Chimanpura, P.S.-Panapur, District-Saran at Chapra.
3. Priyanka Kumari D/o-Shri raghunath Singh, W/o-Abhimanu Singh, R/o-
Bhorha, P.S.-Panapur, District-Saran at Chapra.
4. Vinita Kumari, D/o-Kaushal Kishore Singh, R/o-Vill-Maghri, P.S.-
Basantpur, District-Saran at Chapra.
5. Anish Kumar, S/o-Harendra Singh, R/o-Vill-Maghri P.S.-Bhawanpur.
District-Saran at Chapra.
6. Jitendra Kumar Singh S/o-Bhikhari Singh R/o-Vill-Sahwajpur, P.S.-
Panapur, District-Saran at Chapra.
7. Rima, W/o Om Prakash Kumar, R/o-Vill - Dhenuri, P.S.-Panapur, District-
Saran at Chapra.
8. Indu Devi, W/o-Mahesh Rai, R/o-Vill-Bhorah, P.S.-Panapur, District-Saran
at Chapra.
9. Arun Kuamr Prasad, S/o-Raj Kumar Prasad R/o-Vill-Dubauli, P.S.-Panapur,
District-Saran at Chapra.
10. Renu Kumari, D/o-Bishnudeo Singh, W/o-Manoj Kumar Singh, R/o-Vill-
Pratappur, P.S.-Awtarpur, District-Saran at Chapra.
11. Umesh Kumar Ranjan, S/o-Laldhar Ram, R/o-Vill-Rasauli, P.S.-Panapur,
District-Saran at Chapra.
12. Malti Kumari D/o-Jagannth Prasad, W/o-Chhadilal Prasad, R/o-Vill-
Dahiyawan, P.S.-Nagar, District-Saran at Chapra.
13. Anita Kumari D/o-Bhagwan Singh, R/o and P.O. Dhenuki, P.S.-Panapur,
District-Saran at Chapra.
14. Sarita Kumari W/o Rajeev Kumar, R/o and P.O.-Balia, P.S.-Maharajganj
District-Siwan.
15. Seema Kumari D/o-Dewanand Pandey, R/o-Vill-Hasabir, P.S.-Masrak,
District-Saran at Chapra.
16. Dimpi Kumari D/o-Kameshwar Singh, R/o-Vill-Balhar, P.S.-Amanur,
District-Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Education Officer, Saran at Chapra.
5. The District Programme Officer (Estt.) Saran at Chapra.
6. The Block Education Officer, Panapur, Saran at Chapra.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16959 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
2/7
7. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Bhorah, Block-Panapur, Saran at Chapra.
8. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Bhorah, Block- Panapur,
District-Saran at Chapra.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate.
Ms. Rushali, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Amit Bhushan, AC to GP-17.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 17-04-2025
Heard Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel
along with Ms. Rushali, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioners and Mr. Amit Bhushan, learned AC to GP-17 for
the State.
2. The petitioners in paragraph no. 1 of the present
writ petition have sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is
reproduced hereinafter:-
"(i) To quash the order dated 15.12.2020 passed in
Appeal No- 191/2019 by the State Appellate Authority,
Patna, whereby and whereunder the order dated 25.03.2017
passed in Case No- 15/16 has been modified and further
direction has been issued to the employment Unit of Gram
Panchayat Raj Bhorah, Block-Panapur, District Saran at
Chapra to seek due approval from the competent authorities
with regard to the vacancies of 2008 of the Government and
thereafter proceed to comply with the order as directed by
the Ld. District Appellate Authority. A copy of order dated
15.12.2020
passed in Appeal no-191/2019 is annexed as
ANNEXURE-1 to this application.
(ii) To direct the Employment Unit of Gram
Panchayat Raj Bhorah, Block-Panapur, District Saran at
Chapra to issue appointment letters in favour of petitioners
on the post of Panchayat Teacher forthwith as per order
dated 25.03.2017 passed in Case No- 15/16 and order
contained in memo no- 116 dated 30.08.2018 passed in
Execution Case No- 48/2017 with all consequential and
monitory benefits.
And for any other appropriate relief(s) as per the
facts and circumstances of this case."
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.16959 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
petitioners submitted that the petitioners' name figured in the
select list which was published on 25.02.2009 and the same was
not implemented by appointing the petitioners on the post of
Panchayat Teacher in accordance with the provision of Bihar
Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service
Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules
2006'). Thereafter, the petitioners preferred appeal before the
District Appellate Authority, Saran at Chhapra.
4. The District Appellate Authority directed the
Employment Unit to proceed with the appointment process
within a period of two months. The direction of the District
Appellate Authority was not complied and the petitioners were
forced to approach this Court by filing C.W.J.C. No. 8065 of
2019 and C.W.J.C. No. 8999 of 2019.
5. This Court vide order dated 19.04.2019 and
24.04.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8065 of 2019 and C.W.J.C.
No. 8999 of 2019 respectively directed the District Magistrate,
Saran at Chhapra to ensure compliance of the order dated
25.03.2017 passed by the District Teachers Employment
Appellate Authority, Saran in case No. 15 of 2016, as also the
order dated 30.08.2018 passed by the said Appellate Authority
in Execution Case No. 48 of 2017.
6. The respondents challenged the order dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.16959 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
25.03.2017 passed by the District Appellate Authority in Case
No. 15 of 2016 before the State Appellate Authority. The State
Appellate Authority after considering the entire facts of the case,
as well as, the Resolution contained in Memo No. 465 dated
09.07.2012, particularly Clause '3' of the said Resolution,
directed the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners
and had also directed the respondent Employment Unit to seek
due approval with regard to the vacancy from the competent
authority of the Government. Learned counsel has referred Rule
18 of the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment
and Service Conditions) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as
the 'Rules 2012'), which saves all the past action taken and as
such he contends that the condition contained in Sub Clause '3'
is required to be carried by the said authority.
7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the State submitted that as on date he has no instruction in
respect of the subsequent development which was required to be
carried out in compliance of the judgment and order passed by
the State Appellate Authority dated 15.12.2020 passed in Appeal
No. 191/2019, however, he has also submitted that the Rules,
2006 has been repealed by Rules, 2012 and Rules, 2012 has
subsequently been repealed by the the Bihar Panchayat
Elementary School Service (Appointment, Promotion, Transfer,
Patna High Court CWJC No.16959 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
Disciplinary Proceedings and Service Conditions) Rules, 2020
(hereinafter referred to as 'Rules, 2020) and now selection
process relating to appointment of teacher is conducted by open
competition in terms of the Bihar School Exclusive Teachers
Rules, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules 2023').
Learned counsel further submits that in view of the subsequent
development, the executive instruction contained in Resolution
No. 465 dated 09.07.2012 cannot be given effect and as such
there is no merit in the present writ petition.
8. Having considered the rival submissions made
on behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the order
passed by the District Appellate Authority and the State
Appellate Authority, I find, in the background of the event
which has taken place, the petitioners were selected for being
appointed as Panchayat Teacher. The Employment Unit
restrained from issuing appointment letter to the petitioners. The
petitioners were forced to ventilate their grievance before the
District Appellate Authority and the District Appellate Authority
directed to proceed with the appointment process and comply
the same by issuing appointment letter within two months. The
order of the District Appellate Authority was not carried out and
the petitioners were forced to file C.W.J.C. Nos. 8065 of 2019
and 8999 of 2019. This Court directed to comply the order
Patna High Court CWJC No.16959 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
passed by the District Appellate Authority. Instead of complying
with the order of this Court, respondents preferred appeal before
the State Appellate Authority.
9. The State Appellate Authority after considering
the entire facts of the case and the case of the petitioners having
taken note of the Government Resolution contained in Memo
No. 465 dated 09.07.2012 modified the order passed by the
District Appellate Authority. I find it proper to reproduce the
relevant part of the Government Resolution dated 09.07.2012 as
under:
"fu;kstu gsrq inksa dh x.kuk ,oa forj.k ds lEcU/k esa
i=kad&429] fnukad 22&06&2012 esa of.kZr funsZ"kksa ds vfrfjDr fuEu
egRoiw.kZ funs"k fn;s tk jgs gSa%&
¼i½ oxZ I ls V rd d fy, Lohd`r u;s fo|ky; [kksyus gsrq inksa
esa mnwZ f"k{kd ds in Hkh lfEefyr gSaA ftyk }kjk vko";drk ds vuqlkj
mudk forj.k fd;k tk,xkA
¼ii½ oxZ VI ls VIII rd ds fy, Lohd`r inksa esa vf/klwpuk
la[;k 429 fnukad 22&06&2012 ds }kjk fuxZr ekxZfuns"k dh dafMdk 2 esa
vafdr xf.kr] foKku] lkekftd foKku rFkk fgUnh] vaxzsth] laLd`r Hkk'kk ds
in lfEefyr gSAa ;s in ftyk }kjk vko";drk ds vuqlkj e/; fo|ky;ksa
esa forfjr fd;s tk;saxsA fdUrq fdlh ,d fo'k; ;k fdlh ,d Hkk'kk ds ,d
ls vf/kd in ,d gh fo|ky; esa ugha fn;s tk;saxsA lkekftd foKku ds
vUrxZr f"k{kd ik=rk ijh{kk esa vafdr lHkh fo'k; gksaxsA bfrgkl ,oa Hkwxksy
dh vfuok;Zrk f"kfFky ekuk tk,xkA
¼iii½ ftyk }kjk iwoZ dh fjfDr ¼fookfnr fjfDr dks NksM+dj½
fu;ekuqlkj fu;kstu gsrq tksM+k tk,xkA"
10. Considering the interregnum period, Rules,
2006 was repealed by Rules, 2012. Rule 18 of Rules, 2012 saves
past action and in this background petitioner claims that since
they were selected and appointed letter was not issued due to
arbitrary action of the Employment Unit for their own vested
interest, the appointment of the petitioners directed by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.16959 of 2021 dt.17-04-2025
District Appellate Authority, as well as, the State Appellate
Authority has not been questioned in any manner and this Court
had directed to execute the same. In spite of clear observation
made by the State Appellate Authority in its order, the
respondents have not issued appointment letter in favour of the
petitioners till date.
11. I have no alternative than to direct the District
Education Officer and the District Programme Officer
(Establishment) concerned to call for the service particulars
relating to the petitioners from the Employment Unit and take
appropriate action to comply with the order passed by the
District Appellate Authority and as modified by the State
Appellate Authority vide order dated 15.12.2020 which requires
issuance of appointment letters to the petitioners.
12. The writ petition stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
mantreshwar/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 21.04.2025
Transmission Date NA
