Nirmala Yadav vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 17 March, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Nirmala Yadav vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 17 March, 2011
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                       CWJC NO.6539 OF 2002
NIRMALA YADAV, WIFE OF SHRI SURYA NATH YADAV, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE PARPALIA, POLICE STATION GUTHANI, DISTRICT SIWAN, ASSISTATN
TEACHER OF YADU SAH GOPALJEE PROJECT GIRLS' HIGH SCHOOL,
BHAGWANPUR HAT, POLICE STATION BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTRICT SIWAN
..........................................................................................PETITIONER
                              VERSUS
1.   THE STATE OF BIHAR
2.   THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND
     DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA
3.   THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY EDUCATION, PRIMARY, SECONDARY AND
     ADULT EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT,
     PATNA
4.   THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, SIWAN
5.   SMT. MAMTA KESHARI, DAUGHTER OF SHRI CHANDESHWAR PRASAD
     SINGH, ASSISTANT TEACHER, YADU SAH GAPALJEE PROJECT GIRLS'
     HIGH SCHOOL, BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTRICT SIWAN
...................................................................................RESPONDENTS
                               ********

5 17/03/2011 The petitioner had originally challenged Annexures

3 and 5 by which the petitioner’s service as Assistant Teacher

in Project School of the Second Phase of Yadu Sah Gopaljee

Project Girls’ High School, Bhagwanpur Hat, Siwan

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the School’) was not accepted.

Initially, when the project schools were created and

recognized by the State Government, there were 09

sanctioned posts of teachers which included the Head

Master/ Mistress. In the second phase, the State Government

took the decision to reduce the number of teachers in the

school to 4 + 1. The respondent no. 5 was working on the 4th

post of Assistant Teacher. She came to this Court for a

direction to hold that she was validly working on the 4th post.

Ultimately, respondent no. 5 succeeded and the Court

directed that the case of respondent no. 5 should be
2

reconsidered and approved in terms of the circular no. 142

dated 04.02.1999. Apparently, the petitioner along with other

teachers aggrieved by the order of the Writ Court, filed LPA

No. 520 of 1998, which was subsequently dismissed for

default.

In any event, vide Annexure-12, the petitioner has

been recognized as an Assistant Teacher of the School in view

of the interim order passed in LPA No. 520 of 1998.

The question as to whether the terms of the services

of the teachers of the schools which were selected in the

second phase as project schools could be varied came to be

challenged in this Court in CWJC No. 4783 of 1995 and its

analogous cases. This Court held that the service conditions

of the employees of the second phase schools or the strength

and pattern of the school cannot be altered retrospectively.

By Annexure-13, the petitioner has been given the

pay scale of an Assistant Teacher with effect from 25.01.2000.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that she has been given

the pay scale from the year 2005, whereas other persons who

are similarly situated have been paid their salary from

01.01.1989.

Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 5

submits that the decision of the Full Bench was taken into

consideration and implemented in the year 2005, and

therefore, the petitioner has been granted the pay scale in the
3

year 2005.

No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the

State in this matter.

In the result, this Court has no other option but to

refer the matter back to the Director, Secondary Education,

Government of Bihar, Patna to consider as to whether the

petitioner would be entitled to the pay scale from 01.01.1989

once she has been recognized and accepted as the 5th teacher

in the School. The decision should be taken keeping in view

the decision of the State Government taken with a respect to

persons who are similarly situated to the petitioner and are

working in project schools of the second phase.

The petitioner is directed to file a representation

within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy

of this order and the Director will pass an appropriate order

within a period of three months thereafter.

This application is disposed of with the aforesaid

observations and directions.

Anand                                          ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )
 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *