ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 04-02-2025 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.

And / or 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 of failure of the institution to seek recognition of NCTE for its course and as such the appointment of those petitioners, who had obtained degree after 1996 were held invalid. It has further been clarified that in light of the order dated 11.05.2012 passed in CWJC No.9131 of 2012, the matter was considered and clarification was made wit