IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.
Ajay Kumar Chaudhary S/o Late Rajendra Chaudhary – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case Nos. 20050, 24654 of 2019, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5815 of 2020, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6367 of 2023
Decided On : 03-07-2023
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Jai Prakash Verma.
For the Respondents: Madhaw Pd. Yadaw, Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Mrigendra Kumar, Meera Singh.
IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that petitioners were not entitled to the matric trained scale from the date of their joining as they had not undergone the training course within the stipulated period.
Headnote:
Mandamus - Grant of Matric Trained Scale - [CWJC No. 20050 of 2019, CWJC No. 24654 of 2019, CWJC No. 5815 of 2020, CWJC No. 6367 of 2023] - The court considered the issue of granting matric trained scale to petitioners and the interpretation of relevant judgments. The court found that the petitioners were not entitled to the scale from the date of their joining and dismissed the writ applications.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought a writ in the nature of Mandamus to grant matric trained scale with arrears and consequential benefits from the date of their joining between 1984 to 2003. The petitioners were appointed on compassionate ground or through advertisements and had to complete training within a stipulated period.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were not entitled to the scale from the date of their joining as they had not undergone the training course within the stipulated period. The court dismissed the writ applications, stating that the petitioners were fighting a luxurious litigation and that the directions sought for in the writ applications could not be issued based on the relevant judgments.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to the matric trained scale from the date of their joining, and whether the state was obligated to send them for training.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners were not entitled to the scale from the date of their joining as they had not undergone the training course within the stipulated period. The court also emphasized that the directions sought for in the writ applications could not be issued based on the relevant judgments.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ applications, stating that the petitioners were not entitled to the scale from the date of their joining and that the directions sought for in the writ applications could not be issued based on the relevant judgments.
JUDGMENT :
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
2. On the request of the learned counsel for the parties, these four writ applications have been taken up together for consideration.
3. In all these writ applications, there is a common prayer to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant matric trained scale to the petitioners with effect from completion of two years/three years of their respective joining between the year 1984 to 2003. The petitioners are also praying for a direction to pay all the arrears and the consequential benefits.
Brief facts of the case
4. In order to appreciate the issues involved in these writ applications, this Court would briefly refer to the facts of the case hereunder.
CWJC No. 20050 of 2019
5. In this writ application, the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 were appointed on compassionate ground whereas petitioner nos. 3 and 4 were the direct recruits pursuant to the advertisements. Petitioner no. 1 joined on 12.02.1997. In his appointment letter, there was a stipulation that he would obtain training within a period of three years from the date of his joining. The case of the petitioner no. 1 is that he was relieved for obtaining one year training in Mahila Teacher Training College, Dumara, Sitamarhi and thereafter on completion of training on 29.04.2000, he was relieved from the training centre to join at his place of posting. Subsequently, in the year of 2004, examination was conducted in which he failed. Thereafter he appeared in the training examination held on 31.07.2007 in which result was published on 04.02.2008. He passed the said examination and accordingly he was granted Matric Trained Scale with effect from 31.07.2007.
6. The petitioner no. 2 joined on 07.05.2003. He had the same and one stipulation in his appointment letter. In his case, he completed his two years training course (Diploma in Primary Education) from Indira Gandhi Open University (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IGNOU’) in the session 2007-09 but the said training certificate was not recognized by National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NCTE’), thus, he was sent for six months ‘Samvardhan’ course through the Department in the year 2012. He passed the said ‘Samvardhan’ course with effect from 09.12.2012. The petitioner no. 2 was allowed matric trained scale.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has admitted at the Bar that all the petitioners in this batch of writ applications have been granted matric trained scale with effect from the date of their passing the training examination.
8. Petitioner no. 3 joined his service on 14.08.1984. He had to obtain training within a period of two years from the date of his joining at his own cost. He was relieved to undergo one year training for the Session 1999-2000. It is not his case that during the period 1984 to 1999, he ever approached the authorities to send him for training or to allow him to do the training course at his own cost. The only averment of the petitioner no. 3 is that he underwent training during the Session 1999-2000, thereafter, in the year 2004 examination was conducted and result was published in the year 2005 in which he failed. He again appeared in the Primary Teacher Training Examination in the year 2007 conducted through the Bihar School Examination Board, Patna which he passed on 01.11.2008. He admits that he was granted matric trained scale with effect from 01.11.2008 but his prayer is to allow him the said scale from 14.08.1996 i.e. on completion of two years of joining.
9. The petitioner no. 4 joined his service on 14.08.1984. He was also required to obtain his training within a period of two years from the date of his joining at his own cost. Like petitioner no. 3, he also got relieved to join in Mahila Primary Teacher Education College, Dumra, Sitamarhi for obtaining one year training for Session 1999-2000. He has not made any statement in