IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.7186 of 2007
Usha Yadav, Wife of Birendra Yadav, resident of Village
Baliamahra, P.O. Baliamahra, P.S. Banka, Dist. Banka.
-------- Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Commissioner cum Secretary, Human Resource Development
Department, Bihar, Patna-800001.
3. District Superintendent of Education, Banka.
4. Block Education Extension Officer, Banka, Dist. Banka.
5. Panchayat Niyojan Samiti of Lodham Panchayat under Banka Block,
Dist. Banka.
6. Secretary, Gram Shikshak Niyojan Samiti of Lodham Panchayat
under Banka Block, Dist. Banka.
------- Respondents
-----------
2 22.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the
parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner,
while assailing the impugned order of
termination of service of the petitioner on
the post of Panchayat Shikshak, would submit
that when the respondents could reinstate
Brajmohan Das and Archana Kumari on the post
of Panchayat Shikshak, there would be no
reason for not giving same benefit to the
petitioner, inasmuch as, her service was also
terminated along with the aforesaid two
persons.
Counsel for the State has pointed
out that the educational qualification
obtained by the petitioner was not recognized
by the State of Bihar, inasmuch as, the
2
petitioner had passed her examination from
Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag about which
the issue has stand settled in the judgment
of the Division Bench of this Court in the
case of State of Bihar Vs. Mamta Kumari & Ors.
reported in 2010(4)PLJR 318. He would further
explain that in absence of any pleading in
the writ application that the aforesaid two
persons, namely, Brajmohan Das and Archana
Kumari had also acquired their educational
qualification from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan,
Prayag, the plea of discrimination raised by
the petitioner does not merit any
consideration.
In view of the admitted position
that the petitioner does not hold the
required qualification, no error can be said
to be committed by the respondents in
canceling the appointment of the petitioner
specially when the issue with regard to the
qualification acquired from Hindi Sahitya
Sammellan, Prayag stands settled in the
Division Bench of this Court in the case of
Mamta Kumari (supra).
As with regard to the plea of
discrimination, the pleading, to say the
least, is vague and on that, this Court
3
cannot rely. There is nothing on record to
show that the aforesaid two persons also had
passed the qualifying examination on the
basis of which they were appointed as
Panchayat Shikshak was required from Hindi
Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag.
That being so, this application is
wholly misconceived and the same is,
accordingly, dismissed.
(Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)
Rsh