ORDER

Heard Mr. Chandra Shekhar Singh, along with Mr. Ranjeet Choubey and Mr. Kumar Gaurav Singh, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Subhash Chandra Mishra, learned SC16 for the State and Mr. Chaitanya Swaroop, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Accountant General, Bihar.

2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ petition has sought, inter alia, the following relief(s), which is reproduced hereinafter: –

“I. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing or setting aside the order contained in Memo No. 2345 dated 06.08.2015 passed by the District Programme Officer, Siwan has cancelled the benefits of ACP to the Petitioner.

II. For issuance of an approrpirate writ in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing or setting aside the order contained in Memo No. 833 dated 22.07.2016 rejected the representation of the Petitioner by the Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar (Respondent No. 2).

III. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding and directing the Respondent Authorities to consider and allow the representation dated 02.03.2020 of the Petitioner in the light of order dated 17.10.2019 passed in CWJC No. 6725 of 2018 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah.

IV. For grant of any other relief or reliefs for which the Petitioner deemed entitled into the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner at the outset submitted that the reliefs as prayed for in the present writ petition are similar to the reliefs, which were prayed for in CWJC No.6725 of 2018 (Birender Kumar Singh vs. State of Bihar and Ors.). The petitioner of the said writ petition was also aggrieved by the order dated 06.08.2015, passed by the District Programmer Officer, which was affirmed by the Director, Primary Education, Bihar vide Memo No.833 dated 22.07.2016. In the present writ petition, the petitioner is also aggrieved by the said order passed by the Director.

4. I have perused the order dated 17.10.2019 passed in CWJC No.6725 of 2018. I find it apt to reproduce para-8 and 9 of the same hereinafter; –

“8. The petitioner had then approached the Director Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna by filing appropriate representation, however, the representation of the petitioner has been rejected by an order contained in memo no. 833 dated 22.7.2016 on the following grounds:-

(i) According to the Bihar Taken Over Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rules, 1993, there was provision to grant time bound promotion to the untrained teachers like other employees of the State Government and since the Physical Education Teachers fell under the untrained teachers category, they were entitled to grant of time bound promotion till the 4th pay revision recommendations remained effective i.e. till 31.12.1995, however, upon coming into force of the Bihar State Employees Service Condition (Assured Financial Progression Scheme) Rules, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules 2003’) with effect from 9.8.1999, the teachers of the nationalized school stood not covered by the said Rules. Similarly, the teachers of the nationalized school, who are not covered by the Assured Financial Progression Scheme, 2010 which has come into force on account of the resolution of the Finance Department dated 14.7.2010, in terms of the recommendations of the 6th Pay Revision Commission recommendations.

(ii) According to Clause 16 of the Bihar Nationalized Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rules, 2011, by which the Rules, 1993 were cancelled, also provides that untrained teachers shall not be entitled to promotion to any grade.

(iii) Untrained teachers would be entitled to grade III (original pay scale of matric / inter trained, pay band II, grade pay 4200/- from the date, they have been given trained pay-scale.

(iv) It is thus clear that after 1.1.1996, Physical Education Teachers under the untrained teacher category are not covered by any scheme p