ORDER :

[Shree Chandrashekhar, J.]

I.A. No. 6006 of 2020 [in LPA No. 122 of 2020]

I.A. No. 189 of 2020 [in LPA No. 17 of 2020]

I.A. No. 192 of 2020 [in LPA No. 18 of 2020]

I.A. No. 1155 of 2020 [in LPA No. 75 of 2020]

I.A. No. 1158 of 2020 [in LPA No. 78 of 2020]

I.A. No. 1717 of 2020 [in LPA No. 111 of 2020]

I.A. No. 2034 of 2020 [in LPA No. 121 of 2020]

I.A. No. 5986 of 2020 [in LPA No. 124 of 2020]

I.A. No. 5984 of 2020 [in LPA No. 129 of 2020]

I.A. No. 5294 of 2020 [in LPA No. 305 of 2020]

I.A. No. 5367 of 2020 [in LPA No. 312 of 2020]

I.A. No. 5436 of 2020 [in LPA No. 321 of 2020]

I.A. No. 5550 of 2020 [in LPA No. 329 of 2020]

I.A. No. 6553 of 2020 [in LPA No. 349 of 2020]

1. These interlocutory applications have been filed by the State of Jharkhand seeking condonation of delay in filing these Letters Patent Appeals - in one of the matters the delay is of 412 days.

2. We have heard Mr. Mithilesh Singh, the learned GA IV, Mr. Ashutosh Anand, the learned AAG III and Mr. Gaurang Jajodia, the learned AC to GP II appearing for the State of Jharkhand.

3. Mr. Sunil Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel appears for the NCTE and Mr. Arvind Kumar Chaudhary, Mr. Rohit Sinha, and Mr. Ajit Kumar, the learned counsels appear for the private respondents in the respective Letters Patent Appeals.

4. Having gone through the explanation offered by the State of Jharkhand for condonation of delay in filing these Letters Patent Appeals, we have formed a prima-facie opinion that the State of Jharkhand has failed to show sufficient cause for condoning delays in filing these Letters Patent Appeals.

5. However, it is bearing in our mind that before a final decision is taken in these matters this Court is required to look into the merits of the matters, of course, to a limited extent so as to ascertain whether the State of Jharkhand may suffer irreparable loss and injury if the aforesaid periods of delay in filing these Letters Patent Appeals are not condoned.

6. A batch of seven writ petitions [W.P. (S) No. 963 of 2017, W.P. (S) No. 476 of 2017, W.P. (S) No. 1386 of 2017, W.P. (S) No. 6692 of 2016, W.P. (S) No. 917 of 2017, W.P. (S) No. 4645 of 2018 and W.P. (S) No. 5390 of 2017] was heard together and by a common order dated 12th September 2019 the orders of termination of the writ petitioners issued on different dates have been quashed by the writ Court.

7. Another batch of four writ petitions [W.P. (S) No. 4910 of 2017, W.P. (S) No. 4916 of 2017, W.P. (S) No. 4940 of 2017 and W.P. (S) No. 4949 of 2017] filed by the Assistant Teachers who were terminated from service by the orders issued on different dates has also been allowed on 27th September 2019, in terms of the aforesaid order dated 12th September 2019 passed in W.P. (S) No. 963 of 2017 and analogous cases.

8. Similarly, W.P. (S) No. 6915 of 2017 was allowed on 17th October 2019 in terms of the aforesaid order dated 12th September 2019. And, the interim order dated 26th June 2019 passed in W.P. (S) No. 75 of 2017 with W.P. (S) No. 64 of 2017 is under challenge in LPA No. 17 of 2020 and LPA No. 18 of 2020.

9. The issue involved in all the writ petitions pertains to qualification for appointment on the post of a Teacher for class-VI to class-VIII in the Primary Schools within the State of Jharkhand.

10. The writ Court has taken a view that the writ petitioners possessed the requisite qualification of having a graduation degree not being a Science graduate as required under the Notification dated 23rd August 2010 issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (in short, NCTE).

11. The issue which was debated before the writ Court was whether the qualification as notified by the NCTE which is the Academic Regulator is binding on the State of Jharkhand. A related issue which fell for consideration before the writ Court was whether the writ petitioners who were having Bachelor of Commerce (in short, B.Com) degree and otherwise qualified for appointment as Assistant Teacher for class-VI to class-VIII were rightly and