JUDGMENT G. C. Bharuka, J. - The petitioner prays for quashing the direction issued from the office of the Accountant General, Bihar as contained in memo no. 1671 dated 30.7.93 (Annexure 1') by which Rs. 62,587.65p. has been sought to be recovered from the petitioner being the excess' amount drawn by him against his salaries pertaining to the period 5.3.84 to 31.7.92. 2. At the material time the petitioner was working as a Headmaster in nationalised high school at Khairbani (Dumb). The reason for ordering the said recovery as disclosed in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-Accounts Officer is that the petitioner has unauthorisedly drawn salary by availing increment, without passing Hindi noting and drafting examination which is contrary to the Bihar Government Servant (Hindi Examination) Rules, 1968 (hereinafter, in short, referred to as the 'Hindi Examination Rules' only). It has been placed on record that though the said Hindi Examination Rules had come into force from 15th June, 1968 but for the reasons disclosed in the Government Circular dated 25th January, 1989 issued by the Director, (Secondary Education), Bihar, the provisions of the Hindi Examination Rules have been made applicable in respect of the employees in secondary schools including Headmasters with effect from 9th June, 1983 which is the date from which the Nationalised Secondary Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1983 has been enforced. 3. The petitioner in his rejoinder has stated that the Circular (Annexure 2') has no bearing in his case because his pay, as is evident from Annexure 2', had been verified and found to be correct by the District Education Officer, Dumka. Therefore, according to him it is not permissible on the part of the respondents now to take the stand that the petitioner had withdrawn any excess amount by way of the salary and, therefore, the same should be recovered. It has further been stated that the impugned order of recovery has been passed without granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and, therefore, being violative of the principle of natural justice it should be struck down as 'inoperative. In support of the respective stand of the parties on facts and in law as disclosed in their respective pleadings we have heard the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner as also the respondents, at length. 4. In support of the respective stand of the parties on facts and in law as disclosed in their respective pleadings we have heard the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner as also the respondents, at length. 4. The service conditions of the teachers and Headmasters of Nationalised Secondary Schools are governed by the statutory Rules of 1983 referred to above which have been framed under the provisions of the Bihar Non-Government Secondary Schools (Taking Over of Control and Management) Act, 1981 (hereinafter, mentioned as 'the Act' only). As per Rule-6 of these Rules the Director, Secondary Education is the controlling authority of the cadre of "the Headmasters in such schools being a State cadre. Rule-l0 thereof provides that the Rule for increments in salary will be the same as contained in the Bihar Service Code or the orders of the State Government issued from time to time in this regard. Rule-17 provides that salaries will be determined by the controlling authority, namely, the Director in accordance with the Bihar Service Code or the orders of the State Government issued from time to time in this regard. Rules-3 and 7 of the Hindi Examination Rules referred to above are relevant for the present purpose and the same arc being quoted hereunder : ^^3- gjsd ljdkjh lsod dks] ftldh fu;qfDr ,sls in ij gqbZ gS] tgk¡ mls vius drZO;&lEiknu ds dze esa fVIi.kh fy[kuk vkSj izk:i rS;kj djuk iM+rk gS] ftlesa fjiksVZ vkfn Hkh ‘kkfey gS] nsoukxjh fyfi esa fgUnh fVIi.k vkSj izk:i.k dh ijh{kk esa] ml in ij fu;qfDr ls ,d o”kZ ds Hkhrj] mRrh.kZ gksuk gksxkA tks ljdkjh lsod ljdkjh ladYi la[;k 13632] rkjh[k 11 vDVwcj 1961 ds v/khu fofgr vkSj dsUnzh; ijh{kk lfefr }kjk lapkfyr fgUnh dks foHkkxh; ijh{kk esa mPp ;k fuEu Lrj ls mRrh.kZ gks pqds gSa muds fy, bl ijh{kk esa mRrh.kZ gksuk visf{kr u gksxkA** ^^7- ftu ljdkjh lsod dks nsoukxjh fyfi esa fgUnh fy[kus i<+us dh ijh{kk ;k nsoukxjh fyfi esa fgUnh fVIi.k vkSj izk:i.k dh ijh{kk] vFkok nksuksa ijh{kkvksa esa mRrh.kZ gksuk gS] mls rc rd u rks osru&o`f) nh tk,xh u lEiq”V fd;k tk;sxk] u n{krk jksd gh ikj djus fn;k tk,xk] tc rd og visf{kr fgUnh ijh{kk ;k ijh{kkvksa esa mRrh.kZ u gks tk,A^^ 5. Admittedly the petitioner being a Headmaster in a nationalised secondary school is a government servant and in view of Rulcs10 and 17 pertaining to their service conditions they can be entitled to increments in salaries subject to the conditions laid down under the Hindi Examination Rules. In view of Rule-7 of these Rules as quoted above which clearly provides that a government servant who is required to pass an examination of Hindi Noting and Drafting cannot be given any increment in salary till he passes such an examination. It cannot be disputed that a Headmaster of the school apart from teaching in certain subjects has to essentially involve himself in administrative functions. In that capacity in discharge of his official duties he has to prepare notes and draw drafts in Hindi either for communicating with the other employees of the school or for corresponding with Government and the higher officials in relation to various policy and administrative matters. Therefore, such Headmasters necessarily fall within the ambit of Rule-3 of the Hindi Examination Rules making it necessary for them to pass an examination contemplated therein. The assertion of the petitioner that he holds a Master Degree in Hindi or that he has to merely approve the drafts and notes prepared by his subordinates and clerks is of no consequence. The person having passed Matriculation Examination with Hindi or having any higher university qualification has been exempted from passing an examination of reading and writing .in Hindi as provided under Rule-2 of the said Hindi Examination Rules. But such Board or University examinations are different from passing an examination relating to notings and draftings. No exemption in this regard has been granted to any specified government servant. 6. So far as the Government Circular dated 25th January, 1989 (Annexure 8') referred to above is concerned, the provisions of the Hindi Examination Rules were not made applicable to the employees in Nationalised Secondary Schools because as per Section 4 (3) of the Act except for the age of retirement which is 58 years, the other terms and conditions of their service were continue to be the same as it were before taking over of the management and control of the school until any alteration was made in this regard by the State Government by framing Rules under the Act. The Service Conditions Rules under the Act were made and enforced from 9th June, 1983. Therefore, keeping in view various provisions referred to above, the provisions of the Hindi Examination Rules could be made applicable to the employees of the nationalised high school only from the said date. 7. So far as the pica of the petitioner that since the increment of salary availed by him had been verified and endorsed as' correct by the District Education Officer is concerned, in my opinion, it is absolutely of no consequence. As is apparent from Annexure 2' which is the statement of fixation of his salary, the petitioner himself was Drawing and Disbursing Authority. So far as the District Education Officer is concerned, he appears to have countersigned the same without adverting himself to the relevant Rules partaining to fixation and increments of Salary applicable to the government servants. Therefore, any such countersigning cannot operate as estoppel against the 'Government and restrain it from recovering the excess amount drawn as salary by any particular government servant including the petitioner. 8. Keeping in view. the facts of the case and the relevant Rules referred to above, in my opinion, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief claimed for and as such the writ application is dismissed but without any costs. Gurusharan Sharma, J. - I agree.