Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 620 (PAT)

Rupesh Kumar Sahani v. State of Bihar

2012-04-12

BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA, R.M.DOSHIT

body2012
ORDER Re. Interlocutory Application No. 2712 of 2012. The delay of 90 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. 2. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 538 of 2012. 3. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 9th August, 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 7762 of 2008, the petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. 4. Under the then prevailing scheme, the appellant, then a Matriculate, was appointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in Gram Panchayat Raj North Bhopatpur, Block - Kotwa, East Champaran in 2003 for a period of 11 months. On expiry of the said 11 months, he was reappointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra for a further period of 11 months. While serving as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra for the second term, the State Government passed a resolution enhancing the eligibility for appointment as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra from Matriculation to Intermediate with at least 45% marks. The appellant having not acquired the qualification of Intermediate, his service was not continued since May, 2005. Thereafter, in June 2005 the appellant acquired the qualification of Intermediate with more than 45% marks. Since then, on and from 1st July, 2006 the cadre of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra stood abolished under the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 2006”). With effect from 1st July, 2006 a new cadre of Panchayat Teacher has been created under the Rules of 2006. The Rules of 2006 also provide for the eligibility, the procedure for selection, the authority for selection, etc. in respect of Panchayat Teachers. 5. The appellant approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in CWJC No. 7762 of 2008 to claim deemed continuity of service as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra and deemed absorption as Panchayat Teacher under the Rules of 2006. The appellant relied upon the judgment of this Court in the matter of Kishori Prasad vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. [2008 (2) PLJR 458]. The appellant also relied upon the Government Circular dated 4th July, 2008 issued pursuant to the decision in the matter of Kishori Prasad (supra). The learned single Judge has distinguished the judgment in the matter of Kishori Prasad (supra) and has dismissed the writ petition. Therefore, this Appeal. 6. [2008 (2) PLJR 458]. The appellant also relied upon the Government Circular dated 4th July, 2008 issued pursuant to the decision in the matter of Kishori Prasad (supra). The learned single Judge has distinguished the judgment in the matter of Kishori Prasad (supra) and has dismissed the writ petition. Therefore, this Appeal. 6. The scheme for appointment of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, the Rules of 2006, the judgment in the matter of Kishori Prasad (supra) and the aforesaid Government Circular dated 4th July, 2008 have been considered by us in our judgment in the matter of Smt. Renu Kumari Pandey & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. [ 2011 (4) PLJR 297 ]. We have held that only those of the Panchayat Shiksha Mitras, who were actually functioning as such on 1st July 2006, stood absorbed as Panchayat Teachers by operation of Rule 20(iii) of the Rules of 2006. Since the abolition of the cadre of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, there is no question of deemed appointment or deemed continuance as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra or deemed absorption as Panchayat Teacher. Rights, if any, arising under the scheme for Panchayat Shiksha Mitra stood annihilated by abolition of the cadre of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. 7. In view of the aforesaid judgment, we hold that the appellant has no right to deemed appointment as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra or deemed continuance as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra or deemed absorption as Panchayat Teacher. 8. Appeal is dismissed in limine.