Allowed

Vinod Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC25 Oct 2018CWJC/22479/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking compliance of an order by the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, the Court issued directions to the District Programme Officer to ensure implementation within sixty days and designated the District Magistrate to take coercive measures against obstructing officials.

What did the court decide?

Writ application disposed of with direction to District Programme Officer to implement the Appellate Authority's order within 60 days; District Magistrate directed to take coercive action against obst

Vinod Kumar Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22479 of 2012

¶3

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

¶4

Vinod Kumar Yadav, Son of Sri Sajawal Yadav, Resident of Village- Gareriya, Block - Guthani, District - Siwan

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

¶9

The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna

¶10

The District Magistrate, Siwan

¶11

The Member, District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Siwan

¶12

The District Education Officer, Siwan

¶13

The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Siwan

¶14

The Block Development Officer, Guthani Block, Siwan

¶15

The Block Education Officer, Guthani Block, Siwan

¶16

The Block Teacher Selection Committee, Guthani through its Chairman Cum Prakhand Pramukh, Guthani Block, District Siwan

¶17

.... .... Respondent/s

¶18

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

¶19

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bajrangi Lal, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumar Vikram, Ac to GA-4

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

Date: 25-10-2018

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State.

¶24

The petitioner has filed the present writ application

¶25

for a direction to the respondents to act upon the District Teacher

¶26

Employment Appellate Authority, Siwan dated 30.08.2012 in Case

¶27

No. 566 of 2012.

¶28

On behalf of respondents stand has been taken in

¶29

para 5 to 7 of the counter affidavit, which is quoted herein below:

¶30

“5. That it is humbly stated that vide notification no. 3716 dated 23.10.2008 the district Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal came in existence wherein powers and functions of Appellate

¶31

Patna High Court CWJC No.22479 of 2012 dt.25-10-2018

¶32

2/4

¶33

Authority has been prescribed. And as per circular the order of the learned District Tribunal is final and binding upon the authorities.

¶34

That the department vide its Memo No. 382 dated 04.06.2012 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) directed to ensure the compliance of the order of the learned District Appellate Tribunal.

¶35

That accordingly it is the selection unit who is responsible to comply the order of the learned District Appellate Authority. And hence the writ petition may be disposed of with direction to the concerned Block selection committee to comply the order under execution.”

¶36

From the averments made in the counter affidavit,

¶37

there is no dispute as to the legality and validity of the decision of the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Siwan. The respondents admit that the order of the Appellate Authority is required to be complied with and necessary direction has been issued by the department.

¶38

This Court has noticed the unfortunate trend that the authorities admit the validity of the order passed by the Appellate Authority, but in stead of ensuring its compliance they use to complete the formality by issuing letter/order for implementation, but no follow up action was taken by the authority to see full compliance of the order passed by the statutory authorities.

¶39

Patna High Court CWJC No.22479 of 2012 dt.25-10-2018

¶40

3/4

¶41

Under the rule, when the Statutory Appellate Authority was constituted, the idea was that the authority will act upon the decision of the Appellate Authority, but unfortunately the order of the Appellate Authority is not given effect to and the authority of the Education Department starts blame game. One authority use to toss blame upon other authority, such attitude of the authority is unfortunate.

¶42

Accordingly, noticing the stand in the counter affidavit, the writ application is disposed of with a direction to the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Siwan to see that the order of the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Siwan dated 30.08.2012 passed in Case No. 566 of 2012 is implemented in its true letter and spirit within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶43

In the event any authorities of the Education Department or Panchayat Secretary creates any impediment in implementing the order, the District Programme Officer is required to bring to the notice of the District Magistrate, Siwan such defiance. The District Magistrate, Siwan shall be under obligation to take appropriate coercive measure against all the officials, who are causing impediment in implementation of order of the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority including the Panchayat Secretary,

¶44

Patna High Court CWJC No.22479 of 2012 dt.25-10-2018

¶45

4/4

¶46

so that the order of the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Siwan is given effect to within the time frame indicated

¶47

herein above.

¶48

With the aforesaid, the writ application stands

¶49

disposed of.

¶50

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J)

¶51

Uday/-

¶52

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
UploadingDate	27.10.2018
Transmission Date

Vinod Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar Yadav 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

Bindu Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Newa Lal Thakur Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Dehtesam Anwar and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Kumari Deepmala Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Kumari Krishna Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Narayan Sharma and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.