Allowed

Nivedita Patra v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC21 Dec 2016CWJC/23389/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench disposed of the writ petition calling for quashing the Director's order rejecting the petitioner's appointment as Assistant Teacher. Relying on a Division Bench precedent regarding minority institution appointments, the court allowed the petition on the same terms as the cited judgment.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of on the same line and terms as LPA No. 136 of 2015, implying approval of the petitioner's appointment.

Nivedita Patra Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Education and Admissions | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23389 of 2012

¶3

=========================================================== Nivedita Patra, daughter of Late Kanai Lal Patra, resident of Village + P.O. Bari Khanjarpur, P.S. Barai, District - Bhagalpur

¶4

.... .... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna.

¶8

The Director, Secondary Education, Education Department, Bihar

¶9

(Secondary Education Directorate), Vikash Bhawan, Patna.

¶10

The Joint Director, Secondary Education, Education Department, Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna

¶11

The District Education Officer, Bhagalpur

¶12

The Managing Committee of Durga Charan High School, Bhagalpur through its Secretary

¶13

The Secretary, Durga Charan High School, Bhagalpur

¶14

.... .... Respondents

¶15

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

¶16

Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr. Bishnukant Dubey Mr. Panchu Ram Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC- 9 Mr. Zaiki Haidar, AC to SC- 9

¶17

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT

¶18

Date: 21-12-2016

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶20

counsel for the State.

¶21

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 1271 dated 17.10.2012 passed by the Director, Secondary Education whereby the proposal for approval of the appointment of the petitioner has been rejected; and for commanding the respondents to grant approval of the appointment of

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.23389 of 2012 dt.21-12-2016

¶23

2/3

¶24

the petitioner as Assistant Teacher of the subject Economics in Durga Charan High School, Bhagalpur.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that rejection of the proposal for approval of the petitioner’s appointment on the ground that the petitioner did not have the requisite training, is not in accordance with law. He submits that the issue stands squarely covered by a Division Bench judgment of this Court in LPA No. 136 of 2015 [Mr. Subhash Kumar vs. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department & Ors., reported in 2016 (4) PLJR 608], wherein it has been observed as follows:-

¶26

“ 10 . The appointment of the appellant by the Managing Committee, after following the due procedure, and him having been issued appointment letter dated 14.11.2003 was, thus, in accordance with law and cannot be said to be irregular, muchless illegal. Thus, the limited power of the State in the management of private minority institutions in the matter of appointment of teachers being to the extent of ensuring the minimum eligibility criteria of the person appointed, and in the present case, this Court coming to the conclusion that such appointment was in accordance with the prescribed Rules, the recognition of his service by the competent authority, i.e., the Director, Secondary Education, w.e.f. 18.11.2003, could not have been refused. 11. For the reasons aforesaid, the order of the learned Single Judge dated 30.07.2013 cannot be sustained and is, accordingly, set aside and C.W.J.C. No. 14248 of 2013 stands

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.23389 of 2012 dt.21-12-2016

¶28

3/3

¶29

allowed. The appellant is held entitled for approval of his services with effect from the date on which he joined the school pursuant to his appointment by the Managing Committee of the School under letter dated 14.11.2003. He is also held entitled to all consequential benefits.”

¶30

Learned counsel for the State fairly accepts that the issue

¶31

stands covered by the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench.

¶32

None is present on behalf of the respondent nos. 6 and 7 despite repeated calls.

¶33

Having regard to the stand of the parties, the present writ petition stands disposed of on the same line and in the same terms as LPA No. 136 of 2015.

¶34

(Vikash Jain, J)

¶35

Md. Ibrarul/Chandran

¶36

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	N.A.
Uploading Date	23.12.2016
Transmission Date	N.A.

Nivedita Patra v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nivedita Patra 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rekha Kumari Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Ajit Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Santi Kumari and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Md.Hussian Ahmad and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

M/s Sunny Masala And Kirana Store Vs The Central Bank Of India and Anr.

Smt.Sushila Ray Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.