Appeal by a Panchayat Teacher against cancellation of appointment and removal from service. High Court dismissed appeal in limine, holding appellant failed to prove continued service after term expiry, thus instruction for deemed absorption inapplicable.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.439 of 2012
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10703 of 2010
======================================================
Ajay Kumar Singh, S/O Sri Shibeshwar Singh, R/O Village- Dubyepur, P.O.- Parwana, P.S.-Hathauri, District- Samastipur, presently posted as Panchayat Teacher Rajkiya Madhya Vidyalaya, Dumara Mohan Block, Shivaji Nagar, District- Samastipur.
.... .... Petitioner/ Appellant/s
Versus
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, Senior Advocate
Patna High Court LPA No.439 of 2012 (4) dt.09-07-2014
2/4
For the Respondent Nos.1 to 8 & 11: Mr. Satyendra Kumar Jha,
A.C. to G.P.-3
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
And
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent has been preferred by the writ petitioner Ajay Kumar Singh against the common judgment and order dated 31st January 2012 passed by the learned single Judge insofar as CWJC No.10703 of 2010.
The appellant was appointed as a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra under the Gram Panchayat Raj Dumramohan, Shivajinagar, Samastipur in May 2005. It is the claim of the appellant that since May 2005 he had continuously served as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra till 1st July 2006 and thereafter he stood absorbed as Panchayat Teacher under the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 2006”).
On complaint made by one Ashok Kumar Alok, the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Samastipur (hereinafter referred to as „the Appellate Authority‟) in its order dated 9th December 2009 held that the said Ashok Kumar Alok had better qualification than the appellant. The appointment of the appellant was, therefore, cancelled and direction was issued to appoint the said Ashok Kumar Alok as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra.
The said order and the consequential order
Patna High Court LPA No.439 of 2012 (4) dt.09-07-2014
3/4
removing the appellant from service were challenged by the appellant in above CWJC No.10703 of 2010 and CWJC No.10528 of 2008. The learned single Judge has set side the order of the Appellate Authority on the ground that on 1st July 2006 the cadre of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra stood abolished. The said Ashok Kumar Alok had no right to be appointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra thereafter. In respect of the appointment of the appellant, the learned single Judge has held that in any view of the matter, his appointment as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra was illegal and his service, therefore, cannot be protected. Therefore, this Appeal.
Learned counsel Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh has appeared for the appellant. He has relied upon the Government instruction dated 8th August 2006. He has submitted that the State Government had directed that all those Panchayat Shiksha Mitras whose service was not extended or renewed on account of impending election but were continued in service till 1st July 2006 may be deemed to have been absorbed as Panchayat Teacher under the Rules of 2006.
We do appreciate the contention raised by Mr. Singh. We must, however, say that the appellant has not built up his case to invite invocation of the aforesaid instruction dated 8th August 2006. It is not his case that after the expiry of his term of appointment in April 2006, no order of renewal of appointment was made on account of impending election, and that even in absence of the specific order, he had continued as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra till 1st July 2006. In absence of such a case made out by the appellant, the instruction dated 8th August 2006 cannot be invoked for protection of service of the
Patna High Court LPA No.439 of 2012 (4) dt.09-07-2014
4/4
appellant. In absence of any material on record, we have to believe that on expiry of the term of his appointment in April/May 2006, the appellant did not continue as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. If he were not in actual service as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra as on 1st July 2006 he has no right to absorption or to continue in service as Panchayat Teacher.
For the aforesaid reasons, we see no merit in this Appeal. Appeal is dismissed in limine .
(R.M. Doshit, CJ)
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
Sunil/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant entitled to absorption as Panchayat Teacher despite lack of proof of continued service post-term expiry.
Whether Government instruction dated 8th August 2006 applicable to protect appellant's service.
Ajay Kumar Singh
The State of Bihar
Ashok Kumar Alok
Chief Justice
Ashwani Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
