The State policy excluding non-formal instructors from absorption in service was upheld, affirming that reasonable classification does not violate the equality mandate under Article 14 of the Constitution.

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The instant appeal under Clause 10 of the LETTERS PATENT is directed against the common order dated 28.02.2022 passed in W.P(S) No.4661 of 2018 and analogous cases whereby and whereunder this batch of writ petitions has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge whereby and whereunder the common prayer for extending the benefits to these writ petitioners as that of the Non-Formal/Special Education Instructors in the State of Bihar has been declined.

2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleadings made in the writ petition needs to refer herein which reads as under:

(i) It is pleaded that in the erstwhile State of Bihar a Central sponsored National Adult Education came into existence and started w.e.f. 02.10.1978. Subsequently, another scheme namely Non-Formal Education Scheme was launched in the year 1980-81.

(ii) Petitioners in all these writ petitions are claiming that they were appointed as Instructors in the Non-Formal Education Scheme. Subsequently, the scheme was closed and the engagement of personnel, including the petitioners, stood terminated.

(iii) Aggrieved by the same, some of the persons moved before the Hon'ble Patna High Court by filing writ petitions being CWJC No. 1458 of 1988 and CWJC No. 8418 of 2010, seeking a direction for absorption of the Instructors as permanent employees.

(iv) The petitioners have made a specific averment in these writ petitions that this Court in W.P.(S). No. 5966 of 2008 directed the respondents to take steps in light of the observations made by the Hon'ble Patna High Court in CWJC No. 8418 of 2010 and subsequently, in some other writ petitions filed in this Court, similar observations were made. But, still the services of the petitioners have neither been considered for absorption nor they have been absorbed.

3. Being aggrieved, the writ petitioners has preferred batch of writ petitions being W.P.(S) No. 4661 of 2018 and analogous cases and the same was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide a common order dated 28.02.2022.

4. To challenge the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge, the instant appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioners.

5. It is evident from the factual aspect that the writ petitioners had been appointed by the erstwhile State of Bihar under the Non-Formal Education /Special Education Scheme as Instructors and while they were working but by virtue of policy decision the entire Non-Formal Education Scheme has been closed vide the decision so taken dated 30.05.2007.

6. The writ petitioners along with the others have been allocated their services to the State of Jharkhand after enactment of Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000. The State of Jharkhand has taken policy decision vide Memorandum dated 30.05.2007 whereby and whereunder the employees working under the some of the posts under Non-Formal Education have been decided to be absorbed which would be evident from the nomenclature of the post as referred in the said Notification which is being referred herein as:

7. From the aforesaid tabular chart, it appears that the post of the writ petitioners, i.e., the post of the Instructors has not been mentioned in the said policy decision.

8. The writ petitioners have approached the authority for their absorption on the ground of parity. The respondent-authority when not passed the order in favour of the writ petitioners, they have approached this Court by filing writ petitions being W.P(S) Nos.4516 of 2018, 4542 of 2018, 4571 of 2018, 4661 of 2018 and W.P(S) No.6266 of 2018 which have been tagged and heard together by the learned Single J