1 Letters Patent Appeal No.1353 OF 1995 ---------- Against the judgment dated 5.9.1995, passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 4316 of 1994. -------- 1. Miss Abha Kumari, daughter of Sri Suresh Chandra Ghose. 2.Smt. Meena Kumari, wife of Sri Prafulla Kumar Yadav 3.Smt. Samir Kumar Gupta, son of Sri Murlidhar Sah 4.Bhogendra Thakur, son of Sri Pulkit Thakur 5.Pradeep Kumar Das, son of late Gorelal Das 6.Jamuna Harijan, son of Sri Degharu Harijan 7.Chaudhary Rai, Son of Sri Bhagwat Rai, Petitioner no.1 is Headmistress, Petitioners 2 to 4 Assistant Teachers, Petitioner no.5 Clerk and Petitioner nos. 6 and 7 peons in Girls High School Saraihat Police Station- Saraihat Dist. Dumka ---- Petitioners--- Appellants. Versus 1 The State of Bihar through the Commissioner- cum-Secretary, Human Resources Development Department Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The State of Jharkhand, through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resources Development Deptt.,Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 4. The Director, Secondary Education, HRD Deptt. Govt. Of Jharkhand, Ranchi ----- Respondents--- Respondents. --------- For the Appellant : Mr. Shobh Narayan Singh. For the State : Mr. Shashi Bhushan kumar, Standing Counsel No.16. For State of Jharkhand : Mr. Dhrub Mukherjee. ---------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN S. K. Katriar & Jyoti Saran, JJ. Heard learned counsel for the appellant , Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, learned Standing Counsel No.16 for respondent 2 nos. 1 and 2, and Mr. Dhrub Mukherjee for respondent nos. 3 and 4.The seven appellants are aggrieved by the judgment dated 5.9.1995, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. no.4316 of 1994 (Miss Abha Kumari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), whereby the writ petition has been dismissed. The seven petitioners have preferred the writ petition for a direction to the respondent authorities to regularize their services in the Girls High School, Saraiya Hat, district Dumka (now in Jharkhand). 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. It appears that a policy decision had been taken by the undivided State of Bihar to set up one school in every village exclusively for girls, to be known as a project school. The scheme, inter alia, included that existing private schools can also be taken over for the purpose. 3. The present appellants preferred the aforesaid C.W.J.C. No. 4316 of 1994, wherein both the questions were raised, whether or not the school in question was taken over as a project school, and whether or not their services were also taken over. The State Government issued office order dated 11.5.1993 (Annexure-1), 3 wherein it is stated that the school in question had never been taken over as a project school. The text of the order is set out hereinbelow: ÞizR;sd iz[k.M esa ,d dU;k mPp fo|ky; lfgr pkj ek/;fed fo|ky; dh LFkkiuk dh ;kstuk ds vUrxZr ;kfpdk la0 1229@91 ,oa voekuuk okn la0 264@93 esa fn;s x;s funs”k ds vkyksd esa ifj;kstuk dU;k mPp fo|ky; ljS;k gkV nqedk ¼l0 ia0½ esa LFkkuh; izca/k lfefr n~okjk fu;qDr f'k{kd@f”k{kdsRrj deZpkfj;ksa dh lsok dh ekU;rk ij fopkj djus ds mijkUr ;g ik;k x;k fd ;g fo|ky; u rks LFkkiuk dh ekU;rk izkIr fo|ky; gS lkFk gh ;g Hkh irk pyk fd bl fo|ky; ds fy, fof/kor ftyk f'k{kk inkf/kdkjh ds gLrk{kfjr fof/kor ftyk f'k{kk inkf/kdkjh ds gLrk{kfjr fof/kor ifj;kstuk izfrosnu gh izkIr ugha gqvk gSA fdUrq jktdh; vkns”k la[;k 142 fnukad 4-2-89 esa ;g micU/k gS fd ftyk p;u lfefr n~okjk vuq”kaflr Fks ls gh fo|ky; ds f”k{kd@f”k{kdsrj deZpkfj;ksa dh lsok dh ekU;rk nh tk ldsxh ftUgsa LFkkiuk dh vuqefr izkIr gSA vr% pwfd dU;k mPp fo|ky; ljS;kgkV esa mi;qZDr nksuks ekSfyd rF;ks dk vkHkko gS jkT;kns”k ds i=kad 142 fnukad 4-2-89 esa fofgr vk/kkj ij bl fo|ky; ds f”k{kd@ f”k{kdsRrj deZpkfj;ksa dh lsok dh ekU;rk dk nkok jkT; ljdkj ds vkns”kkuqlkj vLohd`r fd;k tkrk gSAÞ 4. Relying on the same as well as another letter no. 142 dated 4.2.1989, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition with the following observations: “So far the case of petitioners of C.W.J.C. No.4316/94 is concerned, admittedly, no permission to establish the institution was granted and according to the requirement of aforesaid letter no.142 dated 4.2.89 unless the selected project school has been granted permission to establish the school, the services of the Assistant Teacher even if he fulfils other conditions will not be recognized. This provision, in my view, cannot be termed as arbitrary. In that view of the matter, the Director Secondary Education, has rightly taken decision vide Annexure-1 that the services of the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No.4316/94 cannot be regularized.” The matter is, therefore, concluded in so far as the present State of Bihar is concerned. 4 5. This Court passed an order on 8.7.2008 in which it was noted that the school in question now falls within the State of Jharkhand. The State of Jharkhand has filed its counter affidavit, wherein it has stated that it has perhaps taken up the issue a-fresh and the matter is under consideration. We would not like to pursue it further, and leave it at that. The petitioners may pursue the matter before the authorities in the State of Jharkhand. 6. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (Sudhir Kumar Katriar,J.) ( Jyoti Saran, J.) High Court Patna, Dated 14th July, 2009. Vinay/ N.A.F.R.