CAV JUDGMENT

Date :19-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner by the present writ application seeks the following Reliefs:-

(i) Issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 7.2.2020 passed by the Chairperson of State Appellate Authority Patna in Appeal No. 162 of 2018 whereby and whereunder the Appeal of the petitioner has been dis- allowed and order dated 12.11.2014 passed by District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Begusarai in case no.

123/2011 has been upheld.

(ii) Issuance of a further writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 12.11.2014 passed by the Presiding Officer, District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Begusarai in Case No. 123/2011 whereby and whereunder the appointment of petitioner on the post of Panchyat Teacher in Primary School, Harakhpura vide letter dated 13.8.2010 has been declared as illegal and Panchayat Employment unit Koraiya had been directed to take decision for employment of Ruby Kumari, Respondent no.12 within 21 days and submit compliance report.

(iii) Issuance of further writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order contained in memo no.04 dated

30.10.2015 issued under the signature of B.D.O. Garhpura whereby and whereunder employment of petitioner has been rejected and Headmaster of the School has been directed to remove the petitioner from her service from the next date of order which is without jurisdictional order.

(iv) Issuance of further writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the letter no. 8/Ni dated 3.11.2015 issued under the signature of B.D.O. Garhpura Block whereby and where under Respondent no. 12 has been appointed in upgraded Middle school, Harackpura without jurisdiction.

(v) Issuance of a consequential writ in the nature of Mandamus directing an commanding the official respondents to re- instate the service of the petitioner to her post with back wages as the petitioner was validly appointed after following all the procedures on the basis of merit list prepared and since then she had been working without any objection from any corner until order dated 30.10.2015 was issued.

(vi) Issuance of an appropriate holding and declaration that since the petitioner was appointed under the Rule known as Bihar Panchayat elementary teacher, employment and service condition Rule 2006 which was superseded/repeated by Rules 2008 as framed on 25.8.2008 and counseling was held on 28.2.2009 in which Respondent no. 12 had not participated or could not participate but she did not challenge the said counseling and for the first time Respondent no. 12 filed Appeal no. 123/11 on 14.3.2011 is after more than two years instead 30 days as provided under clause Kha (iv) of Notification dated 23.10.2008 without explaining the in ordinate delay but case no, 123/11 was entertained whereas same District Appellate authority had dismissed another Appeal 21/13 vide Judgment contained in memo no. 128 dated 20.10.15 on the ground of delay and thus the order dated 12.11.2014 passed in case no. 123/11 is illegal and is fit to be set aside/quashed.

(vii) Issuance of an appropriate declaration that both the Authorities have illegally held that Uttar Madhyama certificate is not valid for appointment of teacher as equivalency of Utter Madhyama with Intermediate was not disputed and in amended Rule 2008 language based degree has been confined to Moulvi and up shastri not Uttar Madhyama merely because Utter Madhyama certificate is not at par with the degree of up shastri awarded by Sanskrit Universities is as much as Uttar Madhyama Certificate is not based on Language as the petitioner had opted Mathematics, English, Computer and thus Utter Madhyama cannot be said as language based certificate and it has there-fore, not excluded in the Rules 2006 as amended in 2008 and thus both the orders contained in Annexures 1 and 2 are bad in law and are fit to be quashed/set aside and petitioner is fit to be re-instated to her post.

(vi