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

2025 Supreme(Pat) 303

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
PURNENDU SINGH, J.
Md. Hashim Raza S/o Md. Kalamuddin - Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar - Respondent 
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8509 of 2020
Decided On : 04-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mrityunjay Kumar, Mukesh Kr. Singh
For the Respondents: Prabhakar Jha, Umesh Narayan Dubey

The court affirmed that a valid Adeeb-e-mahir degree is equivalent to intermediate qualifications, allowing the petitioners to continue their roles as teachers despite state claims of non-recognition.

Headnote:(A) Bihar Panchyat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 - Legality of teacher appointments based on Adeeb-e-mahir degrees from Jamia Urdu, Aligarh - The petitioners were appointed as Block Teachers but faced removal orders citing non-recognition of their qualifications. The court found their qualifications equivalent to required standards for their roles and quashed the removal orders as misconceived. (Paras 3, 6, 10)

(B) Employment Law - Recognition of degrees - The court emphasized the validity of Adeeb-e-mahir degrees issued by institutions recognized by the Government of India for teaching positions. (Paras 8, 10)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, initially appointed as Panchayat Siksha Mitra, sought relief against removal orders based on non-recognized qualifications. They argued their degrees were valid and recognized by the Government.

Findings of Court:
The communication directing their removal was found to be without basis and thus quashed.

Issues: The key issues addressed included the validity of the Adeeb-e-mahir degree and subsequent actions by the State Government against the petitioners.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Adeeb-e-mahir degree was equivalent to intermediate qualifications and recognized by the Government, thus affirming the validity of the petitioners' appointments.

Result: Writ petition allowed, removal orders quashed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners' requests for writ relief (Para 1 , 2)
2. legal qualifications of petitioners and state arguments (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's consideration of educational qualifications (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. recognition of adeeb-e-mahir degree (Para 8 , 9)
5. court's decision to quash state actions against petitioners (Para 10 , 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT :

PURNENDU SINGH, J.

1. Heard Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar along with Mr. Mukesh Kr. Singh, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Prabhakar Jha, learned GP 27 along with Mr. Umesh Narayan Dubey, learned counsel for the State.

2. Petitioners have inter alia prayed for following reliefs in the paragraphs No.1 of the writ petition:-

“(i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorary or any other appropriate writ/order/direction to quash or set aside the letter no.543 and 545 dated 05.05.2020 issued by the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Aurangabad by which the Block Teacher Employment Unit, Kutumba and Navinagar respectively and all the concern Panchayat Teacher Employment Unit of Kutumba & Navinagar Block have been directed to remove those teachers who are working on the basis of the certificates which are not recognized by the State Government.

(ii) Further for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order/direction to direct the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioners which is due since the month of December, 2019.

(iii) Further for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order/direction to the respondents to stay the operation of impunged letter no.543 and 545 dated 05.05.2020 (Annexure-1 & 1/A) and direct the respondents not to disturb the petitioners from discharging their duties and pay the salary regularly to the petitioners.

(iv) For any other relief/relief(s) for that the petitioners may be found to be entitled to as per the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that petitioners were initially appointed as Panchayat Siksha Mitra and thereafter they were absorbed as Block Teacher after coming into force of the Bihar Panchyat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter refereed to as the “Rules, 2006”) and in light of the policy decision of the State Government. It is the case of the petitioners that at the time of their appointment, petitioners were holding degree of Adeeb-e-mahir [equivalent to Intermediate (10+2)] from Jamia Urdu, Aligarh, duly recognized by the University Grant Commission. Learned counsel submitted that the appointment of the petitioner no.1 and 2 was made in the year 2005 and 2006 respectively and at the relevant time, petitioners were appointed on the basis of their qualification being equivalent to Intermediate. He further submitted that the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Aurangabad has directed the concerned authority to remove the teachers, who are working on the basis of certificates, which are not recognized by the State Government, without considering the facts relating to the petitioners and subsequent training undergone by the petitioners, as they have also passed Diploma in Primary Education (D.P.E.) course from Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) and the same has been brought on record by way of Annexure 6 series. Learned counsel further submitted that the memo No.543 in respect of petitioner no.1 and Memo No.545 in respect of petitioner no.2 both dated 05.05.2020 is based on the subsequent guidelines of the State Government dated 07.05.2013 (Anneuxre A to the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents no.5 and 6) but the same is not in respect of the course Adeeb-e-mahir, rather the same relates to Moallim-E- Urdu degree in respect of eight writ petitioners of CWJC No. 9131 of 2012 (Md. Shamim Anwar & Ors. Vs. the State of Bihar & Ors.). The said consideration was made in respect

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top