IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12299 of 2010 PURNIMA KUMARI CHAUBEY W/O SRI TRIBHUWAN NATH PATHAK R/O PHULMATI BHAWAN, SHUKLA TOLI, P.S. & DISTT.- SIWAN ______ Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, H.R.D. DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SIWAN. 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SIWAN. ________ Respondents ----------- 03. 18.04.2011 A show cause on behalf of respondent No.5 i.e. District Superintendent of Education, Siwan, has been filed today. Now an order has been annexed as Annexure-A where benefit of I.A. trained scale has been extended to the petitioner. The order is dated 8.4.2011. Before this order was passed by the concerned respondent, it is required to take notice of the fact that issue of such kind was already a subject matter of dispute before the High Court in CWJC No.8727 of 2009 which came to be decided on 5.8.2009. It is relevant to take note of the observation of the learned single Judge recorded in para 4 of Annexure-2, which reads “once the impugned order has been quashed deciding law, it is applicable in case of each and every similarly situated persons and without compelling individual teachers to come before this Court and get an order in their favour. Respondents should decide all similar cases by one order. Not complying with the direction of this 2 Court, amounts contempt of the order of this Court.” Obviously such an observation made by the learned single Judge has had no effect on the District Superintendent of Education, Siwan because the petitioner has been compelled to approach the High Court seeking similar relief. A counter affidavit duly sworn by him came to be filed taking a stand that the petitioner is not entitled to such a benefit in view of the so- called Finance Department’s Memo No.2074 dated 4.4.1985 (para 6 of the counter affidavit). The stand taken by the District Superintendent of Education on the face is contemptuous in view of what has been recorded and quoted by this Court in the earlier part of the order. Obviously there is defiance shown by the District Superintendent of Education in the face of a judicial pronouncement which was not even assailed by the State Government in appeal. It is only when the Court directed personal appearance of the District Superintendent of Education that now Annexure-A has been issued granting the benefit to the petitioner. The Court is of the view that such an officer is not fit to hold post of District Superintendent of Education, who does not understand the orders of the High Court and who is hell- bent on not only flouting the orders but also disobeying the directions of the High Court. In view of the same, the Director, Primary 3 Education, Human Resource Development Department, Government of Bihar is hereby directed to suspend respondent No.5, District Superintendent of Education, Siwan, based on the materials which have emerged in the writ application and taking into consideration the counter affidavit which he has filed as well as the observation of the Court which has been taken note of in the earlier part of the order. Departmental proceeding should be carried out and taken to its logical end and a copy thereof should be submitted to this Court on its due completion within a reasonable time frame. The Director shall also consider whether such an officer deserves to be posted in the field at all at any point of time hereinafter. The writ application stands allowed. This order should be communicated to the Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar (Respondent No.3) for taking immediate steps for implementation of this order. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)