Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 313 (JHR)

Chandra Mohan Mundari v. State Of Bihar

2001-05-08

M.Y.EQBAL

body2001
ORDER M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ application the petitioner seeks appropriate direction upon the respondents to consider his claim for granting B.A. Trained scale on the basis of gradation list on the ground, inter alia, that several posts of B.A. trained scale are still vacant. 3. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant teacher in the year 1973 in Primary School in the district of Singhbhum West. Alter joining, the petitioner completed his two years training and was then allowed Matric trained scale with effect from 20.12.74. The petitioner thereafter time to time transferred and after passing I.A. examination he was given I.A. trained scale. The petitioner passed B.A. Examination in 1991. It is contended that in spite of circular and direction time to time issued by the State Government, the petitioner was not granted B.A. trained scale. The petitioner made several representations but nothing has been done. 4. The stand of the respondent No. 3, District Superintendent of Education, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in the counter affidavit, is that persons, who attained training upto the year 1992, have been given B.A./ trained scale. The petitioner though passed B.A. Examination in 1991 but not completed the training for getting B.A. trained scale. However, it is stated in para 14 of the counter affidavit that as per the gradation list the petitioner is Junior to other teachers and his case for promotion shall be considered as and when similarly situated candidates will be considered for promotion. 5. I have heard Mr. M.M. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned JC to SC I. In course of argument Mr. Sharnui brought to my notice the letter/circular No. 2215 dated 19.10.85 and submitted that teachers once completed his training at any point of time as an assistant teacher while serving in the Primary School, was not required to go to further training in order to get I.A. trained scale or B.A. trained scale. JC to SC I has not disputed the said fact and sub-mitted that the petitioner is not required to go for further training in order to get B.A. trained scale. However, learned counsel submitted that the case of the petitioner shall be considered along with similarly situated teachers who were given B.A. trained scale. 6. JC to SC I has not disputed the said fact and sub-mitted that the petitioner is not required to go for further training in order to get B.A. trained scale. However, learned counsel submitted that the case of the petitioner shall be considered along with similarly situated teachers who were given B.A. trained scale. 6. On perusal of Annexure 4 to the writ application, it appears that the petitioner has been discriminated in granting B.A. trained scale, as several other similarly situated teachers, who completed their training in 1992, have been granted B.A. trained scale. In that view of the matter. I am of the opinion that the case of the petitioner deserves consideration by the District Superintendent of Education, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. 7. This writ application is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 3 to consider the case of the petitioner for giving B.A. trained scale and dispose of the representation filed by him by passing a reasoned order within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. Application disposed of.