Veena Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr.Pankaj Kr. Sinha, Advocate Mr.Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Madhaw Pd. Yadaw (GP23) Mr.Rajesh Kr. Sinha, AC to GP 23 ======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER

¶15

7 11-12-2024 The petitioner was a Teacher of Ram Karan Thakur Project Balika Uchha Vidyalaya, Imansarai, Patori, Samastipur. She has filed the instant writ petition for the following reliefs:-

¶16

(i) For setting aside the office order contained in memo no 125P dated 24.08.18 issued by respondent no.2 with respect to petitioner wherein rejecting the claim of approval of service of petitioner on the post of teacher in Ram Karan Thakur Project Balika Uchha Vidyalaya, Imansarai, Patori, Samastipur, he has illegally, arbitrary recorded that same is due to absent since 01.12.2006 which is unsustainable in the eye of law.

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.4786 of 2020(7) dt.11-12-2024 2/7

¶18

(ii) For directing the respondents to grant approval of the continuous service of petitioner with effect from 01.01.1989 alongwith consequential payment of arrear salary till 30.11.2006 (since from 01.12.2006 appointed as NIYOJIT teacher and from 10.02.2012 worked as regular teacher till the date of superannuation i.e. till 30.04.14) and to pay pensionary benefit for the aforesaid period such as, pension, gratuity, provident fund, leave encashment and other admissible retiral dues with up to date interest in terms of notification contained in memo no. 98(P) dated 15.06.18 issued by Department of Education, government of Bihar, approving/recognizing the service of teaching and non-teaching employees of Ram Karan Thakur Project Balika Uchha Vidyalaya, Imansarai, Patori, Samastipur and pursuant to which arrear salary have already been paid to other three teaching and non-teaching employees of the school in question.

¶19

(iii) For directing the respondents to pass necessary orders granting the relief prayed for forthwith, since the petitioner is suffering from many old aged ailments.

¶20

(iv) For any other relief/reliefs to which the petitioner be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of this case.”

¶21

The petitioner has approached this Court for

¶22

cancellation of administrative order dated 24^th of August, 2018 (Annexure 10). The said order was passed by the Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna, holding, inter alia, that the petitioner was absent unauthorizedly w.e.f. 1^st of December, 2006 and therefore she is not entitled to get any benefit of

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.4786 of 2020(7) dt.11-12-2024 3/7

¶24

payment and other consequential allowances after the said school have declared as the Project School of the Government on the basis of the decision taken by the Bihar State Cabinet on 15^th of June, 2018 vide Annexure – 7.

¶25

It is submitted by the learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the petitioner that this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 18887 of 2008 (Annexure 5) directed the State-Respondents to treat the school where petitioner used to work in as Assistant Teacher as Project School for all purposes and act accordingly. The Government preferred an appeal before the Division Bench of this Court being LPA No. 1754 of 2015 which dismissed on contest. Subsequently, the order of the Appellate Court travelled upto the Hon’ble Apex Court and SLP was also dismissed. Thus, the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 18887 of 2008 reached its finality. On the basis of the said order, the State Government under the Education Department passed the following order:--

¶26

“4) ममानननीय उच्च न्यमायमालय, पटनमा कक एकल पनीठ कक ननरर्णय कक नविरुद्ध नविभमाग कनी ओर सक दमायर एल०पनी०ए० ससंख्यमा-1754/2015 एविसं एस०एल०पनी० • ( ससंख्यमा/2018 डमायरनी ससंख्यमा-3386/2018) कक ममानननीय न्यमायमालय दमारमा खमानरज नकयक जमानक कक उपरमान्त रमामकरर ठमाककर बमानलकमा उच्च्च नविदमालय इमनसरमाय, पटकरनी, नजलमा-समस्तनीपकर कक विरर्ण 1984-85 चरर कक नविससृनजत पनरयकजनमा नविदमालय कक रूप ममें स्थमानपत /

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.4786 of 2020(7) dt.11-12-2024 4/7

¶28

ससंचमानलत करनक हकतक नविदमालय कक नलए नदननांक 01.01.1989 कक प्रभमावि सक 01 (एक) प्रधमानमाध्यमापक 08 (आठ) सहमायक नशिक्षक 01 (एक) नलनपक एसंवि 02 (दक) पनरचमारनी कक पददों कक ससृजन कक ससंबसंध ममें प्रशिमासनी पद य सनमनत दमारमा कनी गयनी अनकशिंमा पर नदनमाक-05.06.2018 स कक आहहत मसंनत्रिपनररदद कनी बबठक ममें मकद ससंख्यमा-28 ममें मसंनत्रिपनररदद कनी स्विनीकसृनत कक आलकक ममें रमामकरर ठमाककर बमानलकमा उच्च नविदमालय इमनसरमाय, पटकरनी, नजलमासमस्तनीपकर कक विरर्ण-1984-85 चरर कक पनरयकजनमा नविदमालय कक रूप ममें स्थमानपत / ससंचमानलत करनक एविसं नदननांक-01.01.1989 कक प्रभमावि सक नशिक्षक/नशिक्षककत्तर कनमर्णयदों कनी सकविमा ममान्यतमा उनकक विकतनमानद कक भकगतमान कनी। स्विनीकसृनत पर सरकमार दमारमा ननरर्णय नलयमा गयमा हब। तदनकसमार ममानननीय उच्च न्यमायमालय, पटनमा कक आदकशि कक आलकक ममें मसंनत्रिपनररदद कनी स्विनीकसृनत सक ननमनांनकत कमारर्णविमाई करनक कमा ननरर्णय नलयमा जमातमा हबह-

¶29

विरर्ण-1984-85 चरर कक पनरयकजनमा नविदमालयदों कक ससंबसंध ममें ममानननीय उच्चतम न्यमायमालय कक दमारमा नसनविल अपनील ससंख्यमा-6626-6675/2001 ममें ननधर्धानरत ममापदसंडदों कक अधनीन इस नविदमालय कक नशिक्षक एविसं नशिक्षककत्तर कमर सकविमा कनी ममान्यतमा हकतक स्विनीकसृत ममापदसंड कक पहरर्ण करतक हहैं।

¶30

आदकशि -आदकशि हब नक सविर्णसमाधमारर कनी जमानकमारनी कक नलए इसक रमाजकनीय गजट ममें प्रकमानशित नकयमा जमाय और इसकनी प्रनत महमालकखमाकमार, नबहमार, पटनमा/ ननदकशिक (ममाध्यनमक नशिक्षमा) एविसं नशिक्षमा नविभमाग कक सभनी पदमानधकमानरयदों एविसं सभनी अधनीनस्थ कमायर्धालयदों कक प्रकनरत कनी जमाय।"

¶31

The above order clearly shows that the school

¶32

Patna High Court CWJC No.4786 of 2020(7) dt.11-12-2024 5/7

¶33

where the petitioner used to work was treated as a project school w.e.f. 1^st of January, 1989.

¶34

It is not in dispute that the petitioner used to work in the said school from 2^nd of January, 1984 to 30^th of November, 2006. She left her service w.e.f. 1^st of December, 2006.

¶35

The concerned authority did not consider the petitioner’s claim for financial benefit and other consequential relief on the basis of the decision of the State Cabinet in Department of Education, Government of Bihar dated 5^th of June, 2018 that the said school was recognised as Project School since 1^st of January, 1989.

¶36

Since the petitioner was very much in service w.e.f. 1^st of January, 1989 to 13^th of November, 2006, she is entitled to get all financial benefit of project school relating to her salary and pensionary benefit during the aforementioned period.

¶37

Learned Advocate for the State-Respondents submits that the Director, Secondary Education, by an order dated 24^th of August, 2018 rejected the petitioner’s claim for financial benefit on the ground that she was absent from her service continuously since 1^st of December, 2006. Secondly, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition in 2020, therefore, the instant writ petition is vitiated by

¶38

Patna High Court CWJC No.4786 of 2020(7) dt.11-12-2024 6/7

¶39

delay and laches.

¶40

This Court is not in a position to accept the contention of the respondents on the ground that the cause of action to file the instant writ petition for the petitioner accrued only after passing of the impugned order dated 24^th of August, 2018, therefore, the instant writ petition cannot be said to be vitiated by delay and laches.

¶41

Moreover, it is not disputed that the petitioner worked as an Assistant Teacher of the school since 1^st of January, 1989 to 13^th of November, 2016. Therefore, during the said period she is entitled to get financial and other consequential benefits as a Teacher, Project School. The Director, Secondary Education, was absolutely wrong in holding that the petitioner’s claim cannot be accepted because of her absence since 1^st of December, 2006.

¶42

An employee is entitled to get financial protection and all benefits during his/her service till the date of continuation of the same. When the Education Department declared the concerned school as a Project School with retrospective effect, the teachers and non-teaching staff, who were working during the said period, is entitled to get the benefit for such period.

¶43

Patna High Court CWJC No.4786 of 2020(7) dt.11-12-2024 7/7

¶44

Since the petitioner worked as an Assistant from 1^st of January, 1989 to 13^th of November, 2006, she is entitled to get the arrears salary during the said period as a Project Teacher and subsequently the pensionary benefits, if any.

¶45

The respondent authority is directed to pass necessary order granting the petitioner appropriate relief as aforesaid within a period of 90 days from the date of communication of this order.

¶46

In view of the above discussion, the direction contained in Annexure 10 as regards the petitioner is quashed and set aside.

¶47

The instant writ petition is, thus, disposed of.

¶48

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)

¶49

uttam/-

¶50

U

Veena Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veena Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nikahat Parveen Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Kiran Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Dr. Devnandan Sharma Vs His Excellency, the Chancellor of the Universities of Bihar

Brij Mohan Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Ramesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar