IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13921 of 2008 PRAMOD KUMAR, S/O Sri Baidya Nath Yadav, R/O Village-Saguniya, P.S.Baheri, Dist-Darbhanga………petitioner Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.The Director Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.The District Superintendent of Education, Darbhanga. 5.The Block Development Officer, Baheri, Dist-Darbhanga. 6.The Block Education Extension Officer, Baheri, Dist-Darbhanga. 7.The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj,Nimaithi, Block-Baheri, Dist- Darbhanga. 8.The Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Mimaithi, Block-Baheri, Dist- Darbhanga. 9.Naresh Kumar Sahu, S/o Sri Lakshmi Sahu, R/O Village- Korigama,P.S,Baheri, Distt-Darbhanga,At present working as Panchayat Teacher in Primary Urdu School, Bhawanipur, Nimaithi Block-Baheri, Distt-Darbhanga. ----------- For petitioner:-Mr. Rajeeve Kumar Singh, Adv Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, Adv For Respondents:-Mr.Dilip Kumar Roy, JC to AAG-8 -------- 2/ 25-Nov-08 Heard the parties. Petitioner is aggrieved by decision of the Respondents not to recognize vocational certificate of the petitioner issued by the Bihar Intermediate Education Council as equivalent to intermediate and also by non consideration of his case for appointment to the post of Panchayat Teacher on that ground. He has also prayed for canceling the appointment of Respondent No.9, Naresh Kumar Sahu who is described as Panchayat Teacher at present working in Primary Urdu School, Bhawanipur, Nimaithi Block-Baheri, Distt-Darbhanga. 2 On behalf of the petitioner, reliance has been placed upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 19.2.2008 passed in CWJC. No.4878 of 2007 (Prakash Kumar & Ors V. State of Bihar & Ors) and other analogous cases to submit that this Court has already held that the vocational certificate recognized as equivalent to intermediate will be sufficient minimum education qualification for appointment as Panchayat Teacher under the relevant rules. The decision refers to some earlier judgments on the same point. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that such decisions have been affirmed by a Division Bench on account of Letters Patent Appeal being dismissed. The judgments of the writ court and the judgment passed in L.P.A. have been annexed as Annexure- 17 series. On the basis of aforesaid judgments there is no difficulty in granting the first relief to the petitioner and accordingly it is held that the vocational certificate of the petitioner would be treated as equivalent to Intermediate for purpose of considering petitioner’s case for appointment to the post of 3 Panchayat Teacher. So far as the question of canceling the appointment of private respondent is concerned, ordinarily notice is required before this Court can hold that a particular appointment is bad in law and hence the appointee should be removed. However, the result of the earlier relief is to make the selection process defective and defect goes to the root because persons qualified for being considered have been left out of consideration by treating vocational certificate to be insufficient and not equivalent to Intermediate degree. On that account, the relevant facts have to be examined by the concerned authorities to find out as to how many such persons have been left out and what will happen to the persons wrongly selected and appointed. This exercise must be left to the respondents to be completed within a period of one month from today. It is made clear that on considering the case of the petitioner if he is found fit to be included in the panel and qualified for appointment then he would have to be appointed and in case there is no vacancy left on account 4 of persons below him in the panel getting appointment from before, the last person in the merit list would have to be removed. Hence, this exercise has been left to the concerned respondents. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)