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) 1609

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Harish Kumar, J.
Kumari Indrasan, W/o Sanjeev Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through its Secretary Education Department - Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16863 of 2025
Decided On : 10-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr.Prashant Pratap, GP- 2

The State Appellate Authority can hear appeals against interim orders of the District Appellate Authority, ensuring proper verification of documents before employment termination.

Headnote:(A) Bihar State Teaching Institution Teacher and Employees (Dispute Redressal and Appeal) Rules, 2020 - Rule 14(c) - Appeal against interim order - Court held that the State Appellate Authority has the power to entertain appeals against interim orders of the District Appellate Authority - Emphasized the importance of verifying the genuineness of disability certificates prior to termination of employment. (Paras 2, 11, 12)

(B) Scope of Authority - The State Appellate Authority must not usurp the powers of the District Appellate Authority - It was found that the stay on termination was justified pending the District Appellate Authority’s decision. (Paras 7, 11, 12)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner applied for a Panchayat Teacher post, faced termination due to complaints on disability certificate, reinstated by the State Appellate Authority but again terminated, which led to appeals regarding the genuineness of the certificate.

Findings of Court:
The termination order was set aside as the State Appellate Authority acted beyond its power, and the District Appellate Authority was directed to reconsider the matter.

Issues: The main issue was whether the State Appellate Authority could entertain an appeal against the interim order of the District Appellate Authority.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court concluded that the State Appellate Authority has the jurisdiction to hear appeals against interim orders, highlighting the need for proper verification of certificates before terminating employment.

Result: Writ petition stands disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

Harish Kumar, J.

Heard Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Prashant Kumar, learned GP-2 for the State.

2. The short question for consideration before this Court is as to whether the State Appellate Authority constituted under Bihar State Teaching Institution Teacher and Employees (Dispute Redressal and Appeal) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules, 2020’) entertain an appeal preferred against the interim order of the District Appellate Authority and proceed in the matter itself.

3. Before coming to the issue raised before this Court, the brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had applied for the post of Panchayat Teacher under Gram Panchayat Raj, Govindpur Bela, Patepur, Vaishali against the post of physically handicapped long back in the year, 2008. However, on account of a complaint being made regarding genuineness of the disability certificate of the petitioner, an enquiry was conducted at the level of the Civil Surgeon, Samastipur. On being satisfied with the genuineness of the certificate, finally the petitioner was duly appointed and posted in Navsrijit Primary School, Musahi vide Letter No. 3 dated 14.08.2010. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner also cleared Primary Evolutionary test 2013 and further obtained the Service Training i.e. Diploma in Primary Education (Distance Education) in Sessions 2016-19.

4. In the year, 2021, again on a complaint made by a person, the petitioner was directed to appear before the Chief Medical Officer, Vaishali. In pursuant to the direction of the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Vaishali, the petitioner ensured his appearance, however, all of a sudden the services of the petitioner came to be terminated vide memo No. 1994 dated 27.05.2022. This order was put to challenge before the State Appellate Authority in O.A. No. 230 of 2022. Vide order dated 04.01.2023, the State Appellate Authority directed to reinstate the petitioner and accordingly he was reinstated. The matter did not rest here, again the appointment of the petitioner was cancelled on the ground of his handicapped percentage declared to be ‘0’ (zero) vide Memo No. 3036 dated 26.06.2023, which order was again put to challenge before the District Appellate Authority.

5. The order of cancellation of appointment was further set aside and the matter relegated for reconsideration in terms with the order of the State Appellate Authority, as aforenoted. The District Education Officer once again came out with the termination order of the petitioner vide Memo No. 444 dated 14.05.2025. It is this order, which was questioned in Case No. PAP-110/2025 before the District Appellate Authority, Vaishali.

6. The District Appellate Authority, on being found that before issuance of the order of termination, no verification regarding genuineness of the Medical Certificate was done, vide order dated 14.05.2025 issued show-cause to the District Education Officer, Vaishali and directed to place on record all the report relating to verification of disability certificate of the petitioner. The District Education Officer, Vaishali, instead of filing show-cause and bringing on record the relevant records, straightway rushed to the State Appellate Authority by challenging the order dated 14.05.2025. The State Appellate Authority not only entertained the appeal, but stayed the operation of the order passed by the District Appellate Authority and directed the respondent-petitioner along with Panchayat Secretary of the Gram Panchayat Raj, Govindpur Bela, Patepur, Vaishali to file counter affidavit.

7. While assailing the impugned order, learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the manner, in which the State Appellate Authority has proceeded would certainly amount to usurping all the power of the District Appellate Authority. It is the fact that the petitioner has been discharging his duty as a Panchayat Teacher for more than a decade and, as such, there was no illegality in direc

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