Patna High Court
Rajni Kant Jha vs The State Of Bihar on 7 August, 2025
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12250 of 2025
======================================================
Rajni Kant Jha Son of Lakshmi Kant Jha Resident of Madhubani, Supaul,
P.S.- Lalit Gram, Madhubani, Bihar- 852125.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Education Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Supaul.
5. The District Education Officer, Supaul.
6. The Panchayat Secretary cum Secretary Panchayat Teacher Recruitment
Unit, Madhubani, Supaul.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Isshan Siingh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Ambastha, SC 26
Mr.Subodh Kumar, AC to SC 26
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 07-08-2025
Heard Mr. Isshan Siingh, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar Ambastha,
learned SC 26 along with Mr. Subodh Kumar, learned AC to SC
26 for the State.
2. The petitioner, who was appointed on
compassionate ground on 12.04.2010, was regularly getting
honourarium as per the prescribed provisions contained in Bihar
Panchayat Primary Teacher (Appointment and Service
Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules
Patna High Court CWJC No.12250 of 2025 dt.07-08-2025
2/9
2006') and thereafter, Rules, 2006 was repealed by the Bihar
Panchayat Teachers Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as
'Rules, 2012') and Rules, 2012 was also repealed by Bihar
Panchayat Elementary School Service (Appointment,
Promotion, Transfer, Disciplinary Proceedings and Service
Conditions) Rules, 2020. These Rules were framed as per the
provision of Article 243G of the Constitution of India and
Sections 22 and 47 read with Section 146 of the Bihar
Panchayat Raj Act, 2006. All of a sudden, salary of the
petitioner was stopped from February, 2023. The untrained
teachers of Primary School were getting salary as per the
Resolution No.1530 dated 11.08.2015. The petitioner
represented before the different authorities of the Education
Department and he has brought on record those representations
by way of Annexure - 4 (series) to support his contention that
even though his appointment was illegal, his salary was not
required to be stopped and such communication had been made
by the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, vide
order contained in Memo No.734 dated 08.07.2022.
3. A query was made from the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner in respect of the year of
death of father of the petitioner, who had died in harness and the
Patna High Court CWJC No.12250 of 2025 dt.07-08-2025
3/9
post he was holding on the day he died. In absence of any
information in the writ petition, the matter was adjourned, but
today (i.e. on 07.08.2025) also, no such information has been
given to the Court. The law relating to the applicability of the
governing rules applicable for governing the service conditions
of the employees, who have been appointed on compassionate
ground is now well settled by the Apex Court in the case of The
Secretary to Govt. Department of Education (PRIMARY) &
Ors. Vs. Bheemesh Alias Bheemappa (Civil Appeal No.7758 of
2021) arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.1564 of
2021.
4. As per Annexure -1 (series), the petitioner was
appointed on compassionate ground by the Appointing Unit of
Gram Panchayat, Madhubani as Panchayat Teacher and he was
communicated about his appointment vide letter No.1-2 dated
12.04.2010
. A reference has been made by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondents that Rule 10 of Rules,
2006 deals with the provision relating to appointment on
compassionate ground and the said Rules mandates that if a
person is appointed on compassionate ground, he is mandatorily
required to obtain training within a period of six years from the
date of appointment, as such, the petitioner, who was appointed
Patna High Court CWJC No.12250 of 2025 dt.07-08-2025
on 12.04.2010, was required to obtain requisite qualification
well within a period of six years.
5. Subsequent development also took place mandating
the State Government to provide free education to the children
of Class I to Class VIII of Elementary Schools and to teach the
children, the teachers must possess requisite qualification, as per
the provision of Right to Education Act, 2009. NCTE was
empowered to lay down the requite qualification for teachers of
Elementary Schools and came out with a notification no. 215
dated 23.08.2010, which was amended in the year, 2011 vide
notification no. 158 dated 29.07.2011. The resolution prescribes
the requisite qualification for the Primary School Teachers being
Intermediate (minimum qualification) and training in B.EL-Ed.
The State Government was under obligation to provide them in-
service training to meet the terms and conditions as laid down in
notification of NCTE dated 29.07.2011. Section 23(2) of RTE
Act, 2009 provides for relaxation of five years from the date of
resolution, which mandated the untrained teachers to undergo
in-service training within a period of five years specifically by
31.03.2019. Several representations were filed before the Apex
Court by those Teachers who were aggrieved throughout the
Country which was noticed by the Apex Court in the case of
Patna High Court CWJC No.12250 of 2025 dt.07-08-2025
Ram Sharan Maurya V State of U.P, reported in AIR 2021SC
954, and finally in the case of Devesh Sharma vs. Union of
India & Ors., reported in (2024) SCC OnLine SC 3096,
finding it proper to further relax time by making it obligatory to
obtain in-service training, who were untrained.
6. The Apex Court in the case of Devesh Sharma
(supra), considering the interest of a large number of teachers of
various state vide order dated 08.04.2024 granted one more
opportunity to be afforded. The Apex Court further held that
"the order shall not be confined to the applicant state only and
shall cover all cases which may be pending in different judicial
fora in any State or Union territory on the same point of law."
The observation of the Apex Court in paragraphs no. 8 and 9 as
under:
"8. As it appears that a large number of
candidates with B.Ed. degree had already been appointed
on the basis of eligibility criteria specified by the
educational authorities, we do not think it to be equitable
to effect their removal. We, accordingly hold that the
judgment delivered by this Bench on 11-8-2023 shall have
prospective operation. But prospective operation of this
judgment shall be only for those candidates who were
appointed without any qualification or conditions imposed
by any Court of Law to the effect that their appointment
would be subject to final outcome of the case which might
have had been instituted by them and such candidates
were in regular employment without any disqualification
and were appointed in pursuance of a notice of
advertisement where B.Ed. was stipulated to be valid
qualification. Services of only such candidates shall not be
disturbed because of this judgment. We make it clear that
this benefit is only for the candidates who were appointed
prior to the date our judgment was delivered, on 11-8-
Patna High Court CWJC No.12250 of 2025 dt.07-08-2025
2023. Mere selection of such candidates or their
participation in the process will not entitle them for a
benefit under our present order. (Emphasis supplied)
9. Moreover, the candidates having B.Ed.
qualification whose appointments we are protecting in this
judgment, will have to undergo a bridge course and we
direct the educational authorities to device such course,
which would be applicable for each state and union
territory, within a period of one year from today. This
course shall be only for those appointees who have been
engaged with B.Ed. degree only in the subject-posts under
conditions stipulated in the earlier part of this order.
National Council for Teacher Education shall design such
course under overall supervision of the Ministry of
Education, Union of India. Upon formulation of such
course, the same shall be publicly notified and a
timeframe shall also be given within which the respective
candidates shall participate therein. Failure of any
candidate to participate and complete the course within
the timeframe to be given by the concerned educational
authorities will invalidate the appointment of such
candidate."
7. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the State informs that the steps were taken to terminate the
teachers who had not obtained in-service training and eligibility
to teach the children of primary school. It is further contended
that the petitioner has not even given information regarding his
qualification. To teach the primary school classes (i.e. Class I to
V), minimum qualification is Intermediate pass to become a
basic grade teacher and in absence of such information, the
present writ petition is fit to be dismissed. It is further submitted
by the learned counsel that in view of the law laid down by the
Apex Court in case of Jaiveer Singh & Ors. vs. the State of
Uttarakhand and Ors. reported in (2023) SCC Online SC
Patna High Court CWJC No.12250 of 2025 dt.07-08-2025
1584 and Devesh Sharma (Supra), if the petitioner has
minimum qualification of Intermediate then in that case he
cannot be allowed to continue as a teacher having not undergone
training, even though, sufficient time was left to the petitioner
from the date of his appointment in the year, 2010 to obtain
training. On these grounds, the learned counsel for the State
submitted that the writ petition being devoid of any information
and pleading is fit to be dismissed even without filing any
counter affidavit.
8. Heard the parties.
9. The petitioner is aggrieved for non-payment of
salary from the period February, 2023 till date. Annexure P/1 to
the writ petition reveals that the petitioner was appointed on
compassionate ground on 12.04.2010 and since then the
petitioner was continuously being paid his salary till January,
2023. The petitioner has been able to give information to this
Court that by way of Annexure 4(series), he had continuously
raised his grievance before the appropriate authority for making
payment of due salary. Only on 20.03.2025, an application was
was made to the Director, Primary Education and the similar
application was made to the District Education Officer, Supaul.
Ignorance on the part of the petitioner, who has admitted that he
Patna High Court CWJC No.12250 of 2025 dt.07-08-2025
was paid due salary till January, 2023 but no information has
been given that why he had not approached any legal forum or
any authority for payment of his due salary. In absence of such
information, I have no alternative than to give liberty to the
petitioner to file his detailed representation in respect of his
claim for payment of salary from February, 2023 to till date
before the District Education Officer, Supaul giving all the
information in support of his claim.
10. In case, the petitioner files such representation, the
District Education Officer, Supaul is directed to call for the
service particulars of the petitioner from the school concerned
through the Block Development Officer, Chhatapur and
examine the claim of the petitioner insofar as his entitlement to
continue in service and payment of salary, which according to
the petitioner has abruptly been stopped from February, 2023.
11. This Court has not passed any order on merit as to
whether due to the laches on the part of the State, the petitioner
was not sent for in-service training any time before or after
coming into force of RTE Act, 2009 or the petitioner is himself
responsible for not availing such opportunity at the relevant
time. In absence of any subsequent development, which has
taken place from January, 2023, I am constrained to make any
Patna High Court CWJC No.12250 of 2025 dt.07-08-2025
observation in respect of entitlement of the petitioner on merit.
12. With the above observation/direction, the present
writ petition stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
AFR/NAFR A.F.R.
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 08.08.2025
Transmission Date NA
