SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Pat) 1588

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MRIDULA NISHRA, J.
RAMBHA KUMARI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR – Respondent
CWJC No. 10641, 10571, 10631, 10499, 10876, 10136, 9984, 10039, 11500, 4581 6580, 2216, 9141 of 2008 and 909, 1342 of 2009
Decided On : 24-3-2009

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rules must be given precedent over executive decisions, and any changes in eligibility criteria can only be brought about by suitable amendment in the Rules.

Headnote:

Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers - Up Shashtri Degree - Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (appointment and service condition) Rule 2006 - Rule 8, Rule 20(i) - The court discussed the equivalence of Up Shashtri degree to Intermediate degree, the impact of executive decisions on eligibility criteria laid down in the rules, and the amendment in 2006 Rules regarding the eligibility criteria for appointment on the post of Primary/Prakhand teachers.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners obtained Up Shashtri degree from Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University and were terminated from their service as Panchayat Teachers based on the letters issued by the concerned District Superintendent of Education declaring Up Shashtri degree to be inappropriate for appointment on the post of Primary Teachers.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the executive decision declaring Up Shashtri degree to be inappropriate for appointment on the post of Primary Teachers was contrary to the eligibility criteria laid down in the rules. The court also held that the amended provision under 2008 rules would not have any impact on the petitioners' appointment as Panchayat/Prakhand teachers.

Issues: The issues included the equivalence of Up Shashtri degree to Intermediate degree, the impact of executive decisions on eligibility criteria, and the termination of petitioners' service based on the executive decision.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rules must be given precedent over executive decisions, and any changes in eligibility criteria can only be brought about by suitable amendment in the Rules. The court also emphasized that the amended provision under 2008 rules would not have any impact on the petitioners' appointment as Panchayat/Prakhand teachers.

Final Decision: The respective impugned orders in all these writ applications were quashed, and the petitioners were directed to be reinstated in their positions with payment of arrears of salary as well as current salary.

ORDER :

1. Petitioners in all these writ applications have obtained Up Shashtri degree from Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,Darbhanga. Their grievance is that in terms of Rule 8 of Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (appointment and service condition) Rule 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the 2006 rules, the necessary educational qualification for appointment on the post of Prakhand Teacher and Panchayat Teacher is Intermediate pass or equivalent examination. The degree of Up Shashtri has been recognized by the State Government to be equivalent to Intermediate and in this view of the matter the respondents have no jurisdiction to declare the Up Shashtri Degree holders not eligible/unfit for appointment on the post of Primary teachers in violation of Rules framed by the State Government in exercise of powers vested in it by the Constitution of India and Bihar Panchayat Raj Act 2006.

2. In all these writ applications petitioners have challenged their respective impugned orders, issued by the Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary of their respective Panchayats terminating their service in the light of the letters issued by the concerned District Superintendent of Education in compliance of the order contained in letter no.4240 dated 15.11.2007 issued by the Principal Secretary, department of Human Resources declaring Up Shashtri degree to be inappropriate for appointment on the post of Primary Teachers.

3. Petitioners in all these writ applications were appointed on the post of Panchayat Teachers in terms of Rule 8 of Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (appointment and service condition) Rules 2006. Petitioners in some of the writ applications were appointed on the post of panchayat Siksha Mitra and subsequently absorbed on the post of Panchayat Teachers in terms of Rule 20 (ii) (iii) of 2006 Rules. In some of the writ applications, petitioners were getting their salary but suddenly stopped on the direction of the concerned District Superintendent of Education, but in some of the writ applications, petitioners though appointed and working on the post were not getting their salary at the instance of the concerned District Superintendent of Education.

4. The issue whether the Up Shastri degree is equivalent to Intermediate degree and on that basis appointment could be made on the post of Primary teachers under the rules, after undergoing proper selection, has been settled and decided by this Court in C.W.J.C.No.12456 of 2008 and analogus cases (Ribha Rani- Vrs- State of Bihar and others). It has been decided that the letter no.4240 dated 15.11.2007 issued by the Principal Secretary, so far it relates to degree in Sanskrit equivalent to Intermediate degree must be held to be bad in law because the rules must be given precedent over executive decisions and Rule 8 clearly prescribed that for Panchayat teachers the degree of Intermediate from any institution recognized by the government or any equivalent degree from such institution would be sufficient educational qualification. In this very decision in it has further been held that “On a proper consideration of the submissions advanced by both the parties, this court finds merit in the submission made on behalf of the petitioners. They have a valid cause of action against their threatened removal. The executive decision contained in annexure-1 (letter no.4240 dated 15.11.2007) which is the basis for annexure-2 (termination order) is found to be contrary to eligibility criteria laid down in the Rules. Such a change in the eligibility criteria cannot be treated as clarification or an order removing defects in implementation of the rules. Such changes can be brought about only by suitable amendment in the Rules. It is also found that provisions in Rule 20(i) will not amount to, supercession of all circulars, decisions and rules which are not directly related only to the appointment of primary teachers/physical teachers/panchayat teachers. The equivalence of degrees and recognition of





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top