Dismissed
Sapana Kumari and Anr. v. The Union Of India and Ors.
Patna HCCWJC/8074/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ…
What the court decided
AI extract
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
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6153 of 2016
.... .... Petitioners
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
2/12
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6306 of 2016
======================================================
Smt. Perween Kauser, C/o Arif Hasan Khan, resident of village-Kanhouli, Police Station-Mohiudin Nagar, District Samastipur.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6180 of 2016
======================================================
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
3/12
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6039 of 2016
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
4/12
Ministry of Human Resources Development Department of School and Literacy.
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8100 of 2016
======================================================
Versus
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
5/12
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8074 of 2016
======================================================
Versus
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8058 of 2016
======================================================
Versus
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
6/12
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7266 of 2016
======================================================
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
7/12
Bhagalpur.
.... .... Petitioners
.... .... Respondents
====================================================== Appearance : (In CWJC No.6153 of 2016) For the Petitioners : Mrs. Mahasweta Chatterjee, Advocate. For the U.O.I. : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Addl. S.G. and Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, C.G.C. For the R.Nos. 4 & 5. : Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Parth Sarthi, G.A. 4 and Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, A.C. to G. A. 4. For the BEPC : Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate. (In CWJC No.6306 of 2016) For the Petitioner : Mrs. Mahasweta Chatterjee, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, A.A. G. 2. For the BEPC : Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate. (In CWJC No.6180 of 2016) For the Petitioners : Mrs. Mahasweta Chatterjee, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Nagendra Kumar, A.G. 9. For the BEPC : Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate. For the U.O.I. : Mr. S. D. Sanjay, Addl. S.C. and Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, C.G.C.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
8/12
| (In CWJC No.6039 of 2016 | ) |
|---|---|
| For the Petitioners : | Mrs. Mahasweta Chatterjee, Advocate. |
| For the Respondents : | Mr. Anjani Kumar, A.A.G. 6. |
| For the R.No. 1 : |
Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Addl. S.G. and Kanak Verma, C.G.C. |
| For the BEPC : | Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate. |
(In CWJC No.8100 of 2016 |
) |
| For the Petitioners : | Mrs. Mahasweta Chatterjee, Advocate. |
| For the Respondents : | Mr. Santosh Kumar Jha, G.P. 3. |
| For the BEPC : | Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate |
| For the U.O.I. : |
Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Addl. S.G. and Mrs. Chhaya Mishra, C.G.C. |
| (In CWJC No.8074 of 2016 |
) |
| For the Petitioners : | Mrs. Mahasweta Chatterjee, Advocate. |
| For the Respondents : | Mr. Kaushal Kr. Jha, A.A.G. 14. |
| For the BEPC : | Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate. |
| For the U.O.I. : |
Mr. S.D.Sanjay, Addl. S.G. and Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, C.G.C. |
| (In CWJC No.8058 of 2016 |
) |
| For the Petitioners : | Mrs. Mahasweta Chatterjee, Advocate. |
| For the Respondents : | Mr. Kumar Alok, S.C. 8. |
| For the B.E.P.C. : | Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate. |
| For the U.O.I. : (In CWJC No.7266 of 2016 |
Mr. S.D.Sanjay, Addl. S.G. and Mr. Alok Kumar Jha, C.G.C. ) |
| For the Petitioners : | Mr. Nand Gopal Mishra, Advocate. |
| For the Respondents : | Mr. Kinkar Kumar, S.C. 27. |
| For the U.O.I. : | Mr. Arvind Kumar Tiwary, C.G.C. |
For the B.E.P.C. : |
Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate. |
=================== CORAM: HONOURABL CAV ORDER |
=================================== E MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH |
3 27.02.2018 In all these writ petitions, facts and issues are almost identical, therefore, by this common order, they are being disposed of.
The petitioners are aggrieved by the part of the order contained in Memo No. KGVB/40/2008-09/ 835 dated 16.02.2016, by which the Director, Bihar Education project Council (Respondent No. 5) has communicated the decision taken in 77th meeting of State Executive Committee of the Bihar
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
9/12
Education Project Council, as to make change the name of the post of ‘Part Time Teacher’ as ‘Vocational Training Instructors’ and further holding the said post as a ‘Dying Cadre’, having its purport that with the removal of the incumbent, the post would be automatically abolished.
It is evident from the letter of appointment brought on record that the petitioners being appointed on the post of ‘Part Time Teacher’ in “Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya’ for a period of one year on contractual basis subject to further extension by the Selection Committee. After their initial appointment made on the post of ‘Part Time Teacher’ they had been continuing on the post by virtue of extension of contractual period by the Selection Committee.
In the meantime, in the 77th meeting of the State Executive Committee of Bihar Education Project Council decided to change the designation of the post ‘Full Time Teacher’ as ‘Part Time Teacher’ and earlier ‘Part Time Teacher’ as ‘Vocational Training Instructor’.
Before discussing the issue in question, in my opinion, it would be relevant to take note of the background of the Institution i.e. ‘Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidayalaya’. The ‘Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidayalaya’ (hereinafter referred to as K.G.B.V.) Scheme
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
10/12
was launched by the Government of India in August, 2004 for setting up residential School at upper primary level for girls belonging predominantly SC, ST, OBC and Minorities, in difficult areas. Initially, it was running as a separate Scheme but with effect from 1st April, 2007 it merged with the ‘Sarve Shiksha Abhiyan’(hereinafter referred to as S.S.A. Programme). With coming into force of Right to Education Act, 2009 with effect from 1st April, 2010, opening of K.G.B.Vs. has been extended to all educationally backward Blocks with rural female literacy below the national average as per Census, 2001. The objective behind opening of K.G.B.V. is to ensure access and quality education to the girls from disadvantaged group by setting up residential schools at upper primary level.
As per the guidelines of the Government of India, the S.S.A. State Implementation Society will be the implementing agency of K.G.B.V. at State Level, therefore, funds made available as to run such Institutions are routed through the S.S.A. Society of the State. The funding pattern of the Central Government/State/Union Territories for the K.G.B.V. Scheme will be the same as per the ‘Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan’, as it is a component of S.S.A. with effect from 1st April, 2007. The Government of India directly releases funds to the S.S.A. State
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
11/12
Implementation Societies. The State Government also releases its share to the State Implementation Societies.
The initial engagement of the petitioners was made as ‘Part Time Teacher’ which subsequently renamed as ‘Vocational Training Instructors’. Such engagement was contractual in nature under the scheme of S.S.A., in ‘Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidayalaya. Any dispute relating to their initial contractual appointment/extension of contractual period, and any change in the service conditions cannot be a subject matter of writ jurisdiction of this Court. Since the appointment of the petitioner is admittedly contractual in nature, therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to get any protection under Article 311 or any other provisions under the Constitution of India. They cannot claim similar kind of protection as available to the State Employees. The petitioners being appointed by the Bihar Education Project Council, which is a registered society under the Societies Registration Act for implementation of objectives of ‘Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan’. The petitioners being not a civil servant of the State, therefore, they cannot claim any protection by Article 311 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have no such substantive right to continue on the post beyond the terms and conditions of their contractual appointment, as also, after expiry of
Patna High Court CWJC No.6153 of 2016 (3) dt.27-02-2018
12/12
the contractual period with any extension made by the Selection Committee. Therefore, no mandamus can be issued for enforcement of a non-existent right.
In all these writ petitions, the petitioners are aggrieved by the decision taken in the 77th meeting of the State Executive Committee dated 08.01.2016 of Bihar Education Project Council, by which the post of ‘Part Time Teacher’ being re-named as ‘Vocational Training Instructors’ and the said post being held as Dying Cadre.
In view of the observations and discussions made above, especially taking into consideration of the nature of engagement/appointment of these petitioners i.e. contractual appointment, under a scheme launched by the Government of India, in ‘Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidayalaya’, I am of the considered opinion that such dispute relating to the service conditions of the petitioners is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
These writ petitions are therefore, accordingly, dismissed.
U.K./U
(Sudhir Singh, J)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether disputes regarding contractual appointments and service conditions of Part Time Teachers in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya are amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226.
Whether appointees on a contractual basis under SSA/KGBV scheme are entitled to protection under Article 311 of the Constitution.
Whether the re-designation of posts as 'Vocational Training Instructors' and declaring them as a 'Dying Cadre' can be challenged in court.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Soni Kumari and others
Perween Kauser
Kumari Vijay Laxami and others
Rupam Kumari and others
Union of India
Director, Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court