IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3560 of 2009 Mamta Ram, wife of Navin Ram, resident of village Banuchapra, P.S. Bettiah, Muphasil, District West Champaran … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Collector West Champaran 3. The District Co-ordinator cum District Superintendent of Education, Bettiah, District West Champaran 4. The District Education Co-ordination Project officer, Kumarbag, P.S. Kumarbag, District West Champaran 5. The Headmaster, Kasturba Gandhi Balika Abasiya Vidhyalaya cum Govt. Middle School, Pakhnaha, Anchal Bariya, District West Champaran 6. The Bihar Education Project Council through its Director, Patna … Respondents ---------------------------------- 7. 12.12.2011 Having heard counsel for the parties this Court is of the firm opinion that the prayer of the petitioner in this writ application for acceptance of her joining on the post of teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Pakhnaha, in the district of West Champaran would largely depend on the terms and conditions of appointment of the petitioner. The petitioner claims to have been selected for the post of teacher by the District Superintendent of Education cum District Co-ordinator after undergoing the prescribed procedure. In her representation dated 5.4.2008 she is said to have also submitted her joining but then her said joining was not accepted because the building in question of the school was under construction. This aspect of the matter becomes clear from her representation dated 8.11.2008. That would mean that the appointment of the petitioner even if made by Memo No. 202 dated 2.4.2008 was yet to be acted upon. The petitioner thereafter is said to have actually submitted her joining report on 15.11.2008 which for the first time 2 was accepted by the Headmaster on 16.11.2008 and it is the case of the petitioner that on 16.11.2008 when she had reported for duty she had found herself unable to continue to discharge her duty on account of her continuing advanced stage of pregnancy. The petitioner’s representation dated 25.11.2008 addressed to the Headmaster would only go to show that she wanted extra-ordinary leave by way of leave without pay and thereafter she had also continued to remain absent till 25.12.2008. It is the case of the petitioner that she had submitted her joining report on 26.12.2008 but the Headmaster of the School did not accept her joining whereafter she had brought this fact to the notice of the District Programme Officer, Incharge of Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan, by a representation dated 29.12.2008. When nothing was done even by the said authority she has filed this writ application on 23.3.2009. As usual there is no counter affidavit on behalf of the official respondents. This Court by an order dated 1.12.2011 had impleaded Director, Bihar Education Project Council and also asked him to file his counter affidavit. Mr. Girijesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Director, has produced the report of the Headmaster of the School dated 3.12.2011 to show that the petitioner had submitted her joining on 15.11.2008 and having worked only on 16.11.2008 she had become absent from duty. In the report of the Headmaster it has also been mentioned that the petitioner did not turn up at any point of time after 16.11.2008 though her leave application was received by registered post. Mr. Kumar has also produced the photo copy of 3 the attendance register to show that the petitioner’s working in the school is only for one day i.e. 16.11.2008. It is an admitted position that such an appointment in Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan is made for a period of eleven months and the same is also extended in appropriate cases as per need of the scheme and/or performance of the teacher concerned. In the present case for one reason or another the petitioner did not perform her duty from 4th April to 15th November 2008 and it is her own case that her joining was not accepted because of building in question of the school being under construction. The petitioner again claims that she had joined on 15th November and having worked for a day she had again proceeded on leave even when the same was not sanctioned. Maternity leave is of course part of service condition in a regular employment but whether such maternity leave can be claimed as a matter of right by a person like the petitioner appointed for a fixed tenure of 11 months and that too by way of post factor approval? This will largely depend on the terms and conditions given to the teachers appointed on tenure basis. It is also very difficult for this Court to accept the contention of the official respondents that the petitioner had not reported back on duty on 26.12.2008, inasmuch as the attention of the District Programme Co-ordinator is said to have been drawn by the petitioner by sending her representation by registered post on 29.12.2008. Whether the Headmaster of the School had, therefore, not allowed the petitioner to resume her duty or the petitioner was 4 somehow interested only in getting her employment continued without remaining present in the school is a matter of enquiry. This Court, therefore, would direct the District Programme Officer, In-charge of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan in West Champaran District to examine the grievance of the petitioner as with regard to her acceptance of joining. If other teachers who were engaged with the petitioner have been allowed to continue in service by way of renewal of contract and the petitioner is also found fit in all respect her joining may be also accepted but if it is found that either the scheme has been abandoned or the post occupied by the petitioner has been filled up or the petitioner is not found fit to be retained in service on any ground whatsoever, an appropriate decision in this respect must be communicated to the petitioner by the District Programme Officer within a period of one month from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. It is made clear that even if the joining of the petitioner is accepted and she is allowed to resume her work, she will not be entitled for payment of salary for the period she had remained absent from duty. She may, however, be given all other benefits which has been given to a continuing teacher appointed in the same transaction if such teachers are still continuing in service. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/