Dharmendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10846 of 2025

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

Dharmendra Kumar Son of Lalan Prasad Singh Resident of VillageGopalpur, Post Office- Makhar, Police Station- Akbarpur, District- Nawadah, presently as Assistant Panchayat Teacher in Primary School, Pali, BlockKashichak, District- Nawadah.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The District Education Officer, Nawadah.

¶8

The District Programme Officer (Est.), Nawadah.

¶9

The Block Education Officer, Kashichak, District- Nawadah.

¶10

The Secretary, District Teachers Appellate Authority, Nawadah.

¶11

The Panchayat Secretary, Panchayat Niyojan Unit, Belarh, BlockKashichak, District- Nawadah.

¶12

The Incharge Headmaster, Primary School, Pali Block.

¶13

... ... Respondent/s

¶14

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

¶15

Appearance :

¶16

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arun Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vinay Kirti Singh, GA 2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT

¶17

Date : 10-07-2025

¶18

Heard Mr. Arun Kumar, learned counsel appearing

¶19

on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, learned GA-2 for the State.

¶20

The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present

¶21

writ petition has sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is reproduced hereinafter:-

¶22

(i) For issuance of a writ specially in nature of mandamus commanding and directing upon the Respondent concerned specially Respondent No. 2 to pay the due salary since June 2022 to up till now in view of order bearing Memo No. 74 dated 03.04.2024 issued under the signature of Presiding Officer, District Teacher's Appellate Authority, Nawadah (Annexure-P/4) under which Respondent

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 2/13

¶24

District Education Officer, Nawada is directed to pay the due salary of the petitioner and against that order no appeal has been preferred by Respondent No. 2 and as such the order passed by learned District Teacher's Appellate Authority has got finality and despite continuous communication to the Respondent No. 2 from the level of Respondent No. 5 no response is being given causing non payment of salary to the petitioner.

¶25

(ii) For direction upon the Respondent concern specially Respondent No. 4 to allow the petitioner to make signature on attendance register in his school in view of order passed by learned District Teacher's Appellate Authority, Nawadah as the petitioner has been restrained from making signature in attendance register vide Memo No. 137 dated 07.06.2022 issued under the signature of Respondent No. 4 in compliance to order bearing Memo No. 1044 dated 31.05.2022 issued to Respondent No. 2 which was assailed before learned District, Teacher's Appellate Authority and the appeal has been allowed directing the Respondent No. 2 to ensure the payment of due salary of the petitioner.

¶26

(iii) For further direction upon the Respondent concerned not to create hindrance in discharging his duty as teacher in Primary School, Pali, under Block- Mahrath, District- Nawadah as the appointment of petitioner has already been made in view of order bearing Memo No. 316 dated 10.12.2012 passed by learned District Teacher's Appellate Authority, Nawadah and the same has got finality without any challenge by any one and as such there is no legal impediment in continuance of service of petitioner.

¶27

(iv) For issuance of any other order/orders for granting any other relief/relief for which the petitioner is found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶28

The petitioner is aggrieved for non-payment of salary from July’2022 till date.

¶29

The matter relates to appointment of the Niyojit

¶30

teachers in the second phase appointment process initiated in the year 2008 in accordance with the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006

¶31

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 3/13

¶32

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules 2006’), which had taken at the level of appointment unit, namely, Gram Panchayat Belar (Kashichak). The petitioner though had participated in the counselling held on the notified date, but in spite of having all the requisite qualification, he was not handed over the appointment letter by the Panchayat Selection Committee.

¶33

5. The petitioner has claimed that he being aggrieved with the inaction on part of the teacher selecting unit had approached the District Appellate Authority way back in the year 2012 and after considering his case, the District Appellate Authority directed all the concerned of the Appointing Unit vide order dated 10.10.2012 to proceed in accordance with Rules, 2006, as amended in the year 2008. Long time was taken by the Appointing Unit in considering to appoint the petitioner in compliance of the order dated 10.10.2012 passed by the District Appellate Authority, Nawada. However, after nearly two years, the appointment certificate was issued to the petitioner vide Memo No. 316 dated 10.10.2012, which has been brought on record by way of Annexure P/1 series to the writ petition.

¶34

One private person had filed a complaint on 02.02.2022, as has been stated in the writ petition, before the Public Grievance Redressal Officer in respect of the alleged irregularities committed in selection process relating to second phase initiated in the year 2008 not in accordance with the

¶35

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 4/13

¶36

Rules, 2006. The Public Grievance Redressal Authority, Nawada by holding an inquiry without jurisdiction proceeded to pass order by interfering with the order dated 10.10.2012 passed by the District Appellate Authority, directing to take action against the petitioner. The order was communicated to the District Education Officer vide Memo No. 1044 dated 31.05.2022 in respect of altogether eight panchayat teachers including the petitioner that the alleged irregularities were committed in the selection process of appointment of the petitioner.

¶37

The Block Education Officer, Kashichak also without jurisdiction proceeded to issue office order contained in Memo No. 137 dated 07.06.2022 that the petitioner must be stopped from attending the school. The petitioner has stated that the District Education Officer and the Block Education Officer took action against the petitioner by giving complete go bye to the Bihar Panchayat Elementary School Service (Appointment, Promotion, Transfer, Disciplinary Proceedings and Service Conditions) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules, 2020 ) . If any action was required to be taken, the same was required under the prevailing Rules and after that in accordance with Rule 14 of the Rules, 2020 .

¶38

The provisions of “Bihar State Teaching Institute Teacher’s and Employees (Dispute and Appeal) Rules,

¶39

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 5/13

¶40

2015, as amended Rule, 2020, mandates to file petition under Rule 15(2)(4) before the learned District Teacher’s Appellate Authority, Nawada, in case of any dispute arising out of the appointment of teachers. The Block Education Officer too in complete disregard of the order dated 10.10.2012 passed by the District Appellate Authority and the provision of Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules 2012’) and Rules, 2020 vide Memo No. 137 dated 07.06.2022 restrained the petitioner from attending the school. The petitioner left with no alternative again approached the District Teachers Appellate Authority by filing an appeal no. 09 of 2023 with a prayer to allow the petitioner to attend the school and to pass order against respondent nos. 2 & 4, the District Education Officer and the Block Education Officer who had stopped the petitioner from making attendance in school from 18.10.2022. The District Appellate Authority, Nawada after considering the entire facts and giving opportunity to the District Education Officer, Block Education Officer and the Headmaster of the School, after giving his finding in Paragraph Nos. 5 and 8 vide order dated 03.04.2024 allowed the prayer of the petitioner in Appeal No.09/2023. The relevant part of the order is reproduced hereinafter:

¶41

“¼5½ izkf/kdkj ds i=kad&273 fnukad&12-10-2023]

¶42

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 6/13

¶43

i=kad&237 fnukad&14-09-2023] i=kad&291 fnukad&30-10-2023] i=kad&310 fnukad&01-12-2023] i=kad&318 fnukad&11-12-2023] i=kad&323 fnukad&21-12-2023 ,oa i=kad&07 fnukad&11-01-2024] i=kad&25 fnukad&11-02-2024 ds }kjk rF;kRed izfronsu dh ekWax dh xbZA ftyk f'k{kk inkf/kdkjh] uoknk ls ;g Hkh iPNk dh xbZ fd vkids dk;kZy; ds i=kad&1044 fnukad&31-05-2022 ls fuxZr vkns”k esa vkius izkf/kdkj dk;kZy; ls fuxZr i=kad&316 fnukad&10-10-2012 ¼vkns”k i=½ dks lansgkLin crk;k gS] tcfd mDr i= fuxZr iath ls feyku djus ij lgh ik;k x;kA vki Lo;a mifLFkr gksdj bl rF; dh if"V djus dh d`ik djsa vU;Fkk ,d i{kh; fu.kZ; ysus dh ck/;rk gksxhA fdUrq ftyk f'k{kk inkf/kdkjh] uoknk dk;kZy; ls u rks dksbZ mifLFkr gq, vkSj u gh rF;kRed izfrosnu izkf/kdkj ds le{k izkIr djk;kA

¶44

¼8½ ftyk f”k{kd fu;kstu vihyh; izkf/kdkj] uoknk ds }kjk oknh ls lacaf/kr fo|ky; izkFkfed fo|ky;] ikyh] dk'khpd] uoknk ds iz/kkuk/;kid ls Hkh i=kad&52 fnukad&16-03-2024 ls izfrosnu dh ekWax dh xbZA oknh ds fo|ky; esa D;k fLFkfr gSA bl ij mDr fo| ky; ds iz/kkuk/;kid us izkf/kdkj esa Lo;a mifLFkr gksdj i=kad&109] fnukad&21-03-2023 ds }kjk ;g fyf[kr izfrosnu fn;k fd oknh iz[kaM f”k{kk inkf/kdkjh] dk”khpd] uoknk ds Kkikad&75 fnukad&07-06-2015 ds vkyksd esa izkFkfed fo|ky;] ikyh] dk”khpd] uoknk esa dk;Zjr gSA

¶45

izkf/kdkj ds le{k miyC/k djk;s x;s vfHkys[k ls ;g izrhr gksrk gS fd ftyk f”k{kk inkf/kdkjh ds i=kad&1044 fnukad&31-052022 esa fn;s x;s vkns”k ds ckotwn oknh vius ewy fo|ky; esa dk;Zjr gS] tks ,d cM+h iz”kklfud pwd gSA dk;Zjr vof/k dk osru Hkqxrku ugha djuk C.W.J.C No.-7648/2020 ds U;k; fu.kZ; ds vkyksd esa vij eq[; lfpo] f”k{kk foHkkx] fcgkj ljdkj ds i=kad&746 fnukad&11-07-2022 esa fn;s x;s funsZ”kksa dk mYya?ku gSA

¶46

vkns”k

¶47

ftyk f”k{kk inkf/kdkjh] uoknk dks ;g funs'k fn;k tkrk gS fd foHkkxh; fu;e ds vkyksd esa tkWapksijkar oknh Jh /kesZaUnz dqekj ds dk;Zjr vof/k ds osru Hkqxrku ds laca/k esa ,oa ewy mifLFkfr iath ij mifLFkfr ntZ djus ds laca/k esa fu;ekuqlkj dkjZokbZ lqfuf”pr djsaA okn dks Lohd`r fd;k tkrk gSA ;g fu.kZ; ftyk f”k{kk inkf/kdkjh] uoknk ds Kkikad&1044 fnukad&31-05-2022 esa ek= Jh /kesZUn dqekj ds ekeys esa izHkkoh gksxkA

¶48

g0@&

¶49

ihBklhu inkf/kdkjh

¶50

information from the present District Education Officer whether

¶51

he has taken any action in respect of the petitioner in compliance of two orders dated 10.10.2012 and 03.04.2024 passed by the District Appellate Authority. It has been informed by Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the State that immediately after going through the grievances of the petitioner and the relief as prayed for in the

¶52

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 7/13

¶53

present writ petition he had informed the District Education Officer to inform the Headmaster of the school, as well as, the Block Education Officer to take necessary action to redress the grievance of the petitioner. Today, he informs that the petitioner has joined his duty today.

¶54

A hard copy of the Counter Affidavit on behalf of Respondent nos.2 and 3 has been placed before this Court in course of hearing of this case. Let the same be kept on the record. Information contained in the counter affidavit shows that the petitioner has joined the school. This Court appreciates the action taken by the present District Education Officer in taking immediate action in redressing the grievance of the petitioner after he has joined office on 02.07.2025.

¶55

Heard the parties.

¶56

It is well settled law that any disciplinary action is required to be taken in accordance with law.

¶57

Present is one example, in which this Court can observe that the District Education Officer directed his subordinate, the Block Education Officer, to act as per his wishes. The resultant being that the petitioner has been penalized by stopping him from attending school and non payment of his salary from July’2022 till date.

¶58

The order passed by the District Appellate Authority on 03.04.2024 cannot be faulted in any manner.

¶59

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 8/13

¶60

Article 243(G) of the Constitution of India provides for the manner in which for the upliftment of the general public, Panchayat is empowered to enact Rules governing at Panchayat Level which includes for the welfare of the Society and keeping into account the object of free education to children between the age of 6 years to 14 years. The appointment was made by the local bodies at different level in the year 2002. The State Government was also under obligation to carry on the agreement which the Government of India agreed for imparting education to the children at elementary level. Rules, 2006 came into effect for providing appointment of teachers up to the level of elementary school. Separate enactment also came into existence in the year 2006 in respect of Secondary and Sr. Secondary School. Rules, 2006 was subsequently repealed by Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules 2012’) and all the past action were saved as per the provision of Rule 18 of Rules, 2012, which is reproduced hereinafter:

¶61

“18. Repeal and savings.- (i) All rules/orders/instructions regarding employment of teachers in the elementary schools of rural areas shall be deemed to have been repealed from the date of these rules.

¶62

(ii) Not with standing such repeal, it shall not affect the service conditions of the teachers of the previous district cadre. This will also not affect the special teachers recruitment Rules-2010.”

¶63

A reference in regard to take disciplinary action

¶64

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 9/13

¶65

is contained in Sub Rule ¼N½ of Rule 15 of Rules, 2012, which is reproduced hereinafter:

¶66

¼N½ vuq”kkklkfud dkjZokbZ & ¼i½ fo|ky; ls vknru vuqifLFkr jgus] cPpksa dks izrkfM+r djus vFkok vU; dkj.kksa ls fu;ksftr f”k{kdksa ,oa vuqns'kdksa ds fo:) fdlh vU; izdkj ds izkIr vkjksi ds lEcU/k esa fu;kstu bdkbZ ds lfpo ds }kjk Li’Vhdj.k iwNk tk;sxkA Li’Vhdj.k izkIr gksus ij mldh leh{kk dj fu;kstu lfefr ds v/;{k dh vuqefr ls foHkkxh; dkjZokbZ izkjaHk dh tk;sxhA fdlh ekeys esa tsy tkus vFkok izFke n`"V;k ljdkjh jkf”k ds xcu ds nks’kh ik;s tkus ij mls fuyfEcr fd;k tk;sxkA vU; ekeys esa foHkkxh; dkjZokbZ dh tk;sxhA fuyEcu vFkok foHkkxh; dkjZokbZ ds dze esa vkjksi i= xfBr dj tkWap inkf/kdkjh ls tkWap djkbZ tk;sxh rFkk nks’kh ik;s tkus ij mUgsa fuEu naM fn;s tk ldsaxs%&

¶67

y?kq naM&¼i½ fuUnu

¶68

¼ii½ izksUufr ij jksd

¶69

¼iii½ osruo`f) ij jksd ¼vlap;kRed@lap;kRed½

¶70

o`gr naM& ¼i½ fuEu in ij voufr

¶71

¼ii½ lsokP;qfr tks Hkfo’; esa fdlh fu;qfDr@fu;kstu gsrq fujgZrk ugha gksxhA

¶72

¼iii½ ijUrq ;g Hkh fd fdlh vU; ekeys fo'ks"k esa fo'ks"k dkj.k ls vfHkfyf[kr :i ls vU; dksbZ n.M vf/kjksfir fd;s tk ldsaxsA

¶73

¼iv½ vkjksi izekf.kr gksus ij f}rh; dkj.k iPNk ds i'pkr~ ogr n.M fn;s tk ldsaxsA

¶74

¼v½ fuyEcu vof/k esa fu;r osru dh 50 jkf'k thou fuokZg HkRrk ds :i esa ns; gksxhA

¶75

¼vi½ naM laca/kh vkns'k fu;kstu lfefr ds lfpo ds gLrk{kj ls fuxZr gksxkA bl vkns”k esa mu rF;ksa dk iw.kZ C;ksjk gksxk ftlds dkj.k f'k{kd@vuqns”kd dks izklafxd naM ds ;ksX; ik;k x;k gSA

¶76

¼vii½ ftyk iz'kklu vFkok f”k{kk foHkkx ds inkf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk fujh{k.k ds nkSjku fdlh f”k{kd ,oa vuqns”kd dks fo|ky; ls fcuk lwpuk vuqifLFkr ik;s tkus ij Li’Vhdj.k iwNk tk,xkA Li’Vhdj.k vlarks’kizn gksus ij lacaf/kr f'k{kd ,oa vuqns'kd dh vuqifLFkfr vof/k dk osru dkVus dk funs'k fn;k tk ldsxkA

¶77

The service condition of the petitioner was

¶78

regulated by the provisions of Rules, 2006 and Rules, 2012 till

¶79

Rules, 2020 came into effect. Rules, 2020 prescribes the manner as contained in Rule 14. The prescribed procedure for taking

¶80

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 10/13

¶81

disciplinary action, is self contained. The Rules not only require to follow the principle of natural justice, as well as, jurisdiction is self-contained in respect of the authority, who is vested with the power to take disciplinary action.

¶82

This Court inquired from the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondens to give the names of the District Education Officers, Nawada who, at the relevant point of time, were holding the post. To this, he informed that at the relevant point of time, Sanjay Kumar Chaudhary, Birendra Kumar and Dinesh Kumar Chaudhary were holding the post of the District Education Officer. Hence, it can be said that they have deliberately stopped the petitioner in performing his duties and penalized him.

¶83

Every citizen of the country is governed by ‘Rule of Law’. What is ‘Rule of Law’ has been explained in several decisions, but it has been clearly indicated by the Supreme Court in the Constitution Bench judgment in the case of S.G. Jay Singh Vs. Union of India reported in AIR 1967 Supreme Court 1427 that absence of arbitrary power is the first essence of the rule of law. If the decision is taken without any principle or without any rule, it is unpredictable and is against the rule of law. The question is who is to guard the guards themselves. "Quis Custodiet ipsos custodes?

¶84

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 11/13

¶85

Decided on the above principle of law laid down by the Apex Court, the action of Mr. Sanjay Kumar Chaudhary, the then District Education Officer who had directed the Block Education Officer vide his letter dated 31.05.2022 to restrain the petitioner from attending his duty and, in turn, the Block Education Officer vide his letter addressed to the Headmaster of the school dated 07.06.2022 can be said to have acted willfully not only to disobey the order and direction of the District Appellate Authority, at the same time, without following the due process of law has penalized the petitioner who is facing the consequences till date.

¶86

The other District Education Officers who were also aware of the order passed by the District Appellate Authority dated 10.10.2012 and order dated 03.04.2024 are equally responsible for penalizing the petitioner and having overreached their jurisdiction in doing so, when the order of the District Appellate Authority was challenged before the State Appellate Authority.

¶87

It is expected from the present District Education Officer that he will now proceed to take appropriate steps to make payment of due salary to the petitioner for the period from July 2022 till date. As I have already recorded that non-payment of salary is not on account of any failure on the

¶88

Patna High Court CWJC No.10846 of 2025 dt.10-07-2025 12/13

¶89

part of the petitioner rather the petitioner has been penalized by the three officers whose names I have already recorded in this order and in their respect the matter is required to be referred to the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department so that appropriate action be taken against them for their deliberate action to penalize the petitioner without authority of law.

¶90

It is expected from the Additional Chief Secretary that for taking disciplinary action, he will also seek approval of the Hon’ble Governor to take such action in accordance with law.

¶91

The petitioner is still aggrieved for non-payment of his due salary, whose salary has been denied on the principle of ‘no work no pay’ which Rule will not be applicable in the present case. I, accordingly, set aside the order contained in Memo No. 2064 dated 08.07.2025.

¶92