IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7186 of 2007 Usha Yadav, Wife of Birendra Yadav, resident of Village Baliamahra, P.O. Baliamahra, P.S. Banka, Dist. Banka. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Commissioner cum Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Bihar, Patna-800001. 3. District Superintendent of Education, Banka. 4. Block Education Extension Officer, Banka, Dist. Banka. 5. Panchayat Niyojan Samiti of Lodham Panchayat under Banka Block, Dist. Banka. 6. Secretary, Gram Shikshak Niyojan Samiti of Lodham Panchayat under Banka Block, Dist. Banka. ------- Respondents ----------- 2 22.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the impugned order of termination of service of the petitioner on the post of Panchayat Shikshak, would submit that when the respondents could reinstate Brajmohan Das and Archana Kumari on the post of Panchayat Shikshak, there would be no reason for not giving same benefit to the petitioner, inasmuch as, her service was also terminated along with the aforesaid two persons. Counsel for the State has pointed out that the educational qualification obtained by the petitioner was not recognized by the State of Bihar, inasmuch as, the 2 petitioner had passed her examination from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag about which the issue has stand settled in the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Mamta Kumari & Ors. reported in 2010(4)PLJR 318. He would further explain that in absence of any pleading in the writ application that the aforesaid two persons, namely, Brajmohan Das and Archana Kumari had also acquired their educational qualification from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag, the plea of discrimination raised by the petitioner does not merit any consideration. In view of the admitted position that the petitioner does not hold the required qualification, no error can be said to be committed by the respondents in canceling the appointment of the petitioner specially when the issue with regard to the qualification acquired from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag stands settled in the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mamta Kumari (supra). As with regard to the plea of discrimination, the pleading, to say the least, is vague and on that, this Court 3 cannot rely. There is nothing on record to show that the aforesaid two persons also had passed the qualifying examination on the basis of which they were appointed as Panchayat Shikshak was required from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)