IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.10797 of 2008
Vimla Devi, Wife of Sri Awdhesh Yadav, D/o-Sri Ramashray Prasad Singh,
R/o-Vill.-Paharpur, Gram Panchayat Tarahagar, Block Bihta, District-Patna.
-Petitioner.
VERSUS
1. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.
4. The Collector, Patna.
5. The D.S.E., Patna.
6. The B.E.E.O., Bihta Block, Patna.
7. The B.D.O., Bihta Block, Patna.
8. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Tarahagan, Block Bihta, District Patna.
9. Principal, Primary School, Dalelganj, Panchayat Tarahagan, Block Bihta,
District Patna.
10. Secretary, Vidhyalaya Siksha Samiti, Primary School Dalelganj, Gram
Panchayat Tarahagar, Block Bihta, District Patna. -Respondents.
-----------
04 31.03.2011 The petitioner was recruited as Shiksha Mitra and
posted in the Primary School, Dalelganj Gram Panchayat Tarahagar,
Block Bihta, Distrcit Patna. In 2004 Government took a decision that
persons who had been attained Intermediate qualification with 45%
marks within 33 months their services as Shiksha Mitra would be
continued. Petitioner did obtain the qualification of Intermediate but
with 44.70% marks. In 2006 the Bihar Panchayat Teachers
(Appointment and Service Condition) Rules, 2006 came in and all
Panchayat Shiksha Mitra found working were automatically absorbed
as Panchayat Teacher. Petitioner was also absorbed as Panchayat
Teacher. She had by then cleared her Intermediate examination. All
of a sudden in the year 2007 her salary was stopped on the plea of a
direction from the Collector, Patna that those Panchayat Shiksha Mitra
who had not passed Intermediate examination with 45% marks or
above had to be discontinued and remuneration could not be paid but
petitioner’s services were not dispensed with. It may be noted here
-2-
that subsequently this Court held that any Panchayat Shiksha Mitra
who cleared his Intermediate examination even though beyond 33
months could not be dismissed and if dismissed had been reinstated.
Upon passing the said examination the State Government subsequently
clarified that if a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra serving or dismissed
cleared the Intermediate examination without minimum marks of 45%
he would be continued as Panchayat Teacher and/or if dismissed
reinstated.
It appears that pursuant to the said Government
clarification petitioner has been continued as Panchayat Teacher and
now his only grievance subsists is with regard to arrears of pay for the
month for which in between she had not received her payment. The
same is specified as January, February and March 2007.
Having considered the matter, in my view, the
grievance of the petitioner appears to be genuine. I, therefore, have no
option but to direct the District Superintendent of Education, Patna to
look into the matter of payment of arrears of the petitioner in respect
of three months, as aforesaid, and if it is found that for any reason
payment has not been made to the petitioner for the aforesaid three
months, it shall be his duty to ensure full payment for the aforesaid
period to the petitioner within three months of production of a copy of
this order before him.
With these observations and directions, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)