Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 354 (PAT)

Phulena Prasad Yadav v. State Of Bihar

2005-03-23

NAGENDRA RAI, S.N.HUSSAIN

body2005
Judgment 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 3.2.2005 passed by the learned single Judge by which he has dismissed the writ application filed by the appellant to recognize him as headmaster of the school and upheld the order passed by the authority rejecting his claim. 3. Admittedly, the appellant had earlier come before this Court and the Division Bench of this Court has dismissed his claim. The said Judgment is reported in 1991 (2) PLJR 449. The appellant has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of A.K. Pradhan V/s. The State of Bihar reported in 1998(2) PLJR S.C. 2 wherein the Apex Court while dealing with that particular case has held that in the facts of the case as the appellant before the Apex Court had completed requisite service qualification after taking over of the school, his service should be regularized on the post of headmaster. 4. This Court has considered the aforesaid observation made in A.K. Pradhans case (supra) in the case of Ram Balak Prasad Singh V/s. State of Bihar, reported in 1998(3) PLJR 255, relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab V/s. Samrendra Kumar, reported in AIR 1992 S.C. 1593 wherein the Apex Court has held that the decision of Apex Court is available as precedent only if it decides a question of law, and order of the Supreme Court granting certain relief in exercise of power under Article 142 does not empower the High Court to pass the similar order and this Court to the conclusion that the observations made by the Supreme Court in A.K. Pradhans case (supra) is not an authority to hold that though a person was not having requisite experience for being appointed as headmaster but subsequently be appointed as headmaster after completing requisite experience by regularization, for the reason that the procedure for appointment of headmaster after taking over of the school is different. There is a State cadre of Headmaster and appointment is made by following a procedure prescribed under the rules. If regularization is made by counting subsequent experience after taking over then it will not only disturb the cadre but will also affect the interest of many teachers. 5. There is a State cadre of Headmaster and appointment is made by following a procedure prescribed under the rules. If regularization is made by counting subsequent experience after taking over then it will not only disturb the cadre but will also affect the interest of many teachers. 5. So far decision rendered by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 7064 of 1989 and C.W.J.C. No. 312 of 1992 disposed of on 19.2.1999 are concerned they are pet incuriam as the attention of his Lordship was not drawn to the judgment of Ram Balak Prasad Singhs case (supra). 6. We fully agree with the view taken in Ram Balak Prasad Singh case (supra). 7. In the result there is no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.