Disposed

Raj Nandan Mandal v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC21 Jun 2012CWJC/10050/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of a writ petition regarding the petitioner's exclusion from a teacher panel due to allegations that his institution was fake. The Court directed respondents to take a final decision on institution recognition within two months, applicable to future vacancies.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to take a final decision on institution recognition within two months.

Raj Nandan Mandal Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10050 of 2012

¶2

====================================================== 1. Raj Nandan Mandal Son Of Sri Devi Kant Mandal Resident Of Village - Katharba, Post Office- Basopatti, Police Station - Basopatti, District - Madhubani .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Human Resources And Development , Government Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna 4. Nodel Officer, Education Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna 5. The Staff Selection Commission, Bihar, Patna Through The Secretary, P.O. Vetenary College, Bihar, Patna - 14 6. The Chairman, Staff Selection Commission, Bihar, Patna

¶3

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suraj Narain Yadav For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajesh Singh Gp16 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶4

2 21-06-2012 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, the State and for the Staff Selection Commission. The petitioner was an applicant for the post of Primary Trained Teacher. He is aggrieved by his exclusion from consideration on the ground that the Institution from where he obtained his qualifications was fake alleging that one Ramesh Choudhary who obtained his qualifications from the same Institution at Ranchi during the same session has been included in the panel. Learned Counsel for the petitioner acknowledges that his name does not figure in the list of 34540 persons approved by the Supreme Court. He however submits that the Supreme Court did make an observation that if objections are filed it should be decided in so far as it may be relevant for future vacancies. The petitioner has filed his objections on the aforesaid ground but no final decision was being taken. Learned

¶5

Patna High Court CWJC No.10050 of 2012 (2) dt.21-06-2012

¶6

¶7

Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a Xerox copy of letter dated 6.6.2012 from the Commission addressed to the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, seeking necessary information with regard to the recognition aspect. The grievance is with regard to the absence of any final decision by the respondents.

¶8

Counsel for the Commission submits that it is apparent from the communication dated 6.6.2012 that the Commission has taken all necessary steps.

¶9

Counsel for the State submits that if the matters are under consideration, directions may be given to take final decision expeditiously.

¶10

The Court is of the considered opinion that the same Institution cannot be considered valid in respect of certain candidates and invalid in respect of others for the same session unless there are any valid and lawful distinguishing features. If the Institution is fake across the board, those who may have been selected shall also have to make way. It is therefore considered desirable that sooner the respondents take a final decision on the aspect of recognition of the Institution the better it shall be for all.

¶11

In so far as the petitioner is concerned any such decision even if favourable shall apply in respect of future vacancies only subject to fulfilling the conditions of eligibility as may be subsequently laid down in the selection process.

¶12

Let such appropriate decision on the recognition be taken by the respondents preferably within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of this order before the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department.

¶13

The writ application stands disposed.

¶14

(Navin Sinha, J)

¶15

Snkumar/-

Raj Nandan Mandal v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Nandan Mandal v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Gopalganj District Nationa Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Basudeo Pd. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Rupam Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Narad Bihari and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Tufail Ahmad Khan Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Ramjatan Kumar and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.