Partly allowed

Yugal Kishore Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC26 Sept 2016L.P.A/1307/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed the condonation of delay in filing a second appeal regarding a teacher's reengagement for a third term due to lack of Intermediate qualification, subsequently dismissing the appeal as the appellant had no right to challenge the dismissal. The case and delay were disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Delay condoned for LPA; LPA dismissed.

Yugal Kishore Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.1307 of 2015

¶3

Arising out of

¶4

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 20192 of 2010

¶5

Along with

¶6

Interlocutory Application No.5699 of 2015

¶7

=========================================================== Yugal Kishore Singh, S/o Sri Radha Shyam Singh, R/o Village Mahasi, P.S. Obra, District Aurangabad.

¶8

.... .... Petitioner- Appellant/s

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Bihar.

¶11

The Primary Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶12

The Director, Primary Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶13

The District Magistrate, Aurangabad.

¶14

The District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad.

¶15

The Block Development Officer, Obra Block, District Aurangabad.

¶16

The Secretary of Gram Panchayat Bal, P.S. Obra, District Aurangabad.

¶17

.... .... Respondents- Respondent/s

¶18

===========================================================

¶19

Appearance : For the Appellant/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr. Harish Kumar- G.P.-8

¶20

===========================================================

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA And

¶22

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA)

¶25

Date: 26-09-2016

¶26

Re.: Interlocutory Application No.5699 of 2014

¶27

The application is for condonation of delay of 2 years and

¶28

127 days in filing of the present Letters Patent Appeal.

¶29

Patna High Court LPA No.1307 of 2015 dt.26-09-2016

¶30

2/3

¶31

For the reasons mentioned in the application, we find that sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay. Consequently, we condone the delay in filing of the present Letters Patent Appeal.

¶32

Interlocutory Application stands allowed accordingly.

¶33

Re.: Letters Patent Appeal No.1307 of 2015

¶34

The challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal is to an order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 3^rd of February, 2012 whereby, the writ application filed by the appellant challenging the order of District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority (for short, ‘the Appellate Authority’) dated 14^th August, 2010 remained unsuccessful.

¶35

The learned Appellate Authority found that the appellant had not acquired the qualification of Intermediate, therefore, he was not granted third extension as Shiksha Mitra in the year 2005 and that the subsequent acquisition of qualification after 40 months from the date of his first engagement will not entitle the appellant for reengagement. The learned Appellate Authority has, inter alia, found that after the 2^nd term of the appellant ended, the post was filled up by appointing another incumbent. The appellant has not acquired minimum qualification of Intermediate, therefore, he could not be engaged for the third term.

¶36

Patna High Court LPA No.1307 of 2015 dt.26-09-2016

¶37

3/3

¶38

In view thereof, we do not find that the appellant has any right to challenge the decision of the appellate authority dated 14^th August, 2010 as affirmed by the learned Single Bench. He could not acquire basic qualification for appointment even after two extensions; therefore, there was no option but not to re-engage the appellant as Shiksha Mitra. Consequently, the Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed.

¶39

(Hemant Gupta, J.)

¶40

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

¶41

Sunil/-

¶42

AFR/NAFR N. A. F. R. CAV DATE N. A. Uploading Date Transmission Date

Yugal Kishore Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yugal Kishore Singh 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

Ramayan Pandey Vs The Bihar State Financial Corporation and Ors.

Manikant Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Amal Kumar Choudhary Vs The State Bank Of India and Ors.

Sheopujan Singh @ Dr. S.p. Singh Vs Union Of India, Ministry Of Hrd and Ors.

Managing Director North Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd. and Ors. Vs M/s Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

Sanjay Kumar Vs Gagan Kumar and Ors.