Back
2016 Supreme(Pat) 1440
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PATNA
I.A. Ansari, Anjana Mishra, JJ.
Krishnandan Kumar and Ors. - Appellants
Vs.
The State of Bihar and Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case Nos. 10187, 9993 and 10434 of 2016
Decided On: 05-08-2016
For the Appellant :Y.V. Giri, Senior Advocate, Satish Kumar Sinha and Firoz Ahmad, Advocates
For the Respondent: Lalit Kishore, PAAG, Roy Shivajee Nath, AAG-3 and Prabhat Kumar Verma, AAG-5
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the government has the power to unilaterally alter the conditions of service of its employees, including with retrospective effect, as long as it does not take away vested rights of the employees.
Headnote:
Evaluation Test - Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher - 2006 Rules, 2009 Rules, 2012 Rules, 2015 Rules - The court discussed the amendments made to the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules and their impact on the evaluation test for primary teachers. The key legal provisions discussed include the power of the government to unilaterally alter the conditions of service of its employees, the distinction between government and private sector employees, and the limitations on retrospective amendments that take away vested rights of employees.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were appointed as Primary Teachers in Bihar under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006. Subsequent amendments to the rules introduced evaluation tests and conditions for increment and termination based on the test results. The petitioners challenged the validity of these amendments.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the amendments to the rules, including the provision for termination based on evaluation test results, were legally sustainable. It held that the government has the power to unilaterally alter the conditions of service of its employees, including with retrospective effect, as long as it does not take away vested rights of the employees.
Issues: The main issues were whether the amendments to the rules, particularly the provision for termination based on evaluation test results, were contrary to the service conditions embodied in the 2006 Rules and whether the government had the legal competence to make such provisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the government has the legal competence to unilaterally alter the conditions of service of its employees, including with retrospective effect. It emphasized that while such alterations can be made, benefits acquired or vested rights of employees under the existing rules cannot be impaired or taken away by retrospective amendments.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions, finding no merit in the challenges against the amendments to the rules. It also allowed the State Government to make further amendments providing additional chances to the teachers appointed under the 2006 Rules.
I.A. Ansari, J.
1. By Notification, dated, 01.07.2006, issued by the Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 2006 Rules'), came into force and pursuant thereto, an advertisement was published calling for applications for appointment as teachers of primary and middle schools in the State of Bihar. In response to the advertisement, the petitioners herein applied.
2. Under the 2006 Rules, the modalities and the conditions of service were that Trained Block Teachers and Panchayat Teachers would be employed on the fixed pay of Rs. 5,000/- per month; whereas Untrained Block Teachers and Panchayat Teachers would be employed on the fixed pay of Rs. 4,000/- per month. The conditions of service, embodied in 2006 Rules, envisaged that after every three years, there would be an evaluation test and based on the result of the said evaluation, a trained teacher would receive, if he succeeded, an increment of Rs. 500/- and an untrained teacher would receive, on such evaluation, if he succeeded, an increment of Rs. 300/- per month. The conditions of service, embodied in 2006 Rules, also envisaged that the teachers, appointed under the said notification, would remain in employment till the age of 60 years.
3. Following the selection process aforementioned, the petitioners were employed as Primary Teachers.
4. The 2006 Rules came to be amended by the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) (Amendment) Rules, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 2009 Rules'), contained in Notification, dated 03.07.2009, issued by the Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar.
5. Under the amended sub-Rule (iii) of Rule 12 of 2009 Rules, which superseded sub-Rule (iii) of Rule 12 of the 2006 Rules, the evaluation test, as prescribed in respect of Primary Teachers, were to be held, after every three years the total evaluation test being two. The pass mark for the candidates of general category was minimum 45%; whereas, the pass mark for reserved category candidates was minimum 40%.
6. Under 2009 Rules, those teachers, who failed to obtain requisite marks in the evaluation test, were not to be given increment, but they were to be given one more chance for re-evaluation after six months for making improvement in their marks and, upon reevaluation, the teachers, securing less than the prescribed minimum marks, were to be removed from service by the employer.
7. 2009 Rules came to be challenged before this Court by way of a writ petition made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, the writ petition was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 01.12.2009 (See: Dr. Sushil Kumar v. State of Bihar, reported in (2010 (1) PLJR 277).
8. What is necessary to bear in mind is that though the writ petition, which gave rise to Dr. Sushil Kumar's case (supra), was dismissed, the Court did take notice of the fact that it had been submitted by way of an affidavit by the State, in the writ petition, that after three years evaluation test would be held again, but this evaluation test would be only for the purposes of awarding second consolidated increase in pay to those, who would be successful by securing minimum marks, but those, who failed to get the minimum marks, would not be removed from service on this ground.
9. 2006 Rules came to be, once again, amended by Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 2012 Rules') and the same came into force by Notification, dated 03.04.2012. Rule 15(Kha)(i) of 2012 Rules, which is pari materia with Rule 12(iii) of 2009 Rules, envisaged that teachers appointed, pursuant to 2006 Rules, would be evaluated as regards their merit in the manner prescribed by 2006 Rules. Based upon such evaluation, candidates of general category, securing minimum 45%, and candidates of reserve
