IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9758 of 2009 1. ARTI KUMARI WIFE OF RANJEET PASWAN, R/O VILLAGE BHUSARI, P.S. SAMASTIPUR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 2. RANJU KUMARI, D/0 SITA RAM PASWAN, R/O VILL. MUSEPUR, P.S. KALYANPUR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 3. VIDYA KUMARI, W/0 MAHESH SINGH, R/0 VILL. RAMCHANDRA ANDHEL, P.S. UJIARPUR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 4. SHRAVAN KUMAR SON OF SHRI VISHWANATH RAJAK, R/O VILL. DADHIA ASADHAR, P.S. ANGAR GHAT, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 5. NAND LAL DAS SON OF JAWAHAR DAS, R/O VILL. KEOS NIJAMAT, P.S. SAMASTIPUR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 6. SUNITA KUMARI, D/O VISHWANATH RAJAK, R/O VILL. DADHIA ASADHAR, P.S. ANGHARGHAT, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR- ---PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SAMASTIPUR 5. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SAMASTIPUR 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION AND EXTENSION OFFICER, SAMASTIPUR 7. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KALYANPUR 8. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, KALYANPUR 9. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, UJIARPUR 10. THE BLOCK EDUCATION AND EXTENSION OFFICER, JIARPUR 11. MUKHIA, CHHATAUNA PANCHAYAT, BLOCK AND DISTRICT SAMASTIPUR 12. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, CHHATAUNA PANCHAYAT, BLOCK AND DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 13. MUKHIA, BHAGIRATHPUR PANCHAYAT, KALY ANPUR, SAMASTIPUR 14. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, BHAGIRATHPUR PANCHAYAT, KALYANPUR, SAMASTIPUR 15. MUKHIA, RAMCHANDRAPUR ANDHAIL, UJIARPUR, SAMASTIPUR 16. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, RAMCHANDRAPUR ANDHAIL, UJIARPUR, SAMASTIPUR 17. MUKHIA, KEOS NIJAMAT PANCHAYAT, SAMASTIPUR 18. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KEOS NIJAMAT PANCHAYAT, SAMASTIPUR----- RESPONDENTS. For the petitioners:- Mr. U.K. Shukla,.Advocate For the State:- S.C. 11. 2 28.8.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the counsel - 2 - appearing for the State. Petitioners’ prayer is for quashing the order contained in memo no.3490 dated 27.9.2008 issued under the signature of Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. By the impugned order petitioners’ claim for reinstatement in service has been rejected on the ground that they were appointed on the basis of the certificates issued by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad. Petitioners’ case were being considered by the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna in the light of the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. No. 4007 of 2007 and analogous cases dated 30.6.2008. By order dated 30.6.2008 several cases including C.W.J.C. No. 4857 of 2007 was disposed of. Petitioners in the present writ application had preferred C.W.J.C. No. No. 4007 of 2007. The High Court while allowing the prayer of the petitioners regarding termination of their service by the respondents on the basis of their acquiring certificates of Madhyama Visharad issued from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad had quashed the order of termination and the matter was remanded to the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department to examine the matter afresh and take - 3 - decision in accordance with law. While considering the case of the petitioners finding was recorded that degree of Madhyama Visharad (equivalent to Intermediate) granted subsequent to 1995 Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad was not recognized as it was Post NCTE Act i.e. 17.8.1995. Petitioner had possessed their degrees prior to 1995, as such their cases needed fresh consideration. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.2 passed the impugned order without considering this fact that fresh policy decision of the State Government which is prospective in nature cannot have any impact on such appointments which were made earlier considering their requisite qualifications for the posts on which they were appointed. Annexure-10 has been annexed by the petitioners which is a decision of this Court passed in CWJC No. 10748 of 2008, finding recorded in this decision is as follows:- “This Court has held in more than one case that issues of eligibility, qualifications equivalence etc. for appointment are for the employer to decide. But these have to be decided by employer before the process of selection commences. If the employer was callous in not being cautious about its own duties and left a grey area in pursuance of which the employer himself granted certain benefits and provided employment, this Court is afraid that it shall not permit the employer to now re-write or - 4 - explain the advertisement to exclude persons whom the employer had earlier found fit for employment.” Finally this Court held that the policy decision on the issue of equivalence of Madhyama qualification subsequent to the appointment of the petitioner shall not be applicable in the case of the petitioners, and such decision can have only prospective effect. The present case is fully covered by the decision of this Court in CWJC No. 10748 of 2008 (Annexure-10). Accordingly the impugned order passed by respondent no.4 is quashed so far as these petitioners are concerned, their appointments on the post of Panchayat Shikshak was held valid earlier, considering their certificates of Madhyama Visharad examination, treating him equivalent to Intermediate, issued from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad. The direction earlier issued by this Court for reinstating the petitioner on the post they were duly absorbed as Panchayat Shikshak is further directed to be complied with. Respondent Nos. 11 to 18 are directed to reinstate the petitioners on the post of Panchyat Shikshak and allow them to discharge their duties with all consequential benefits. (Mridula Mishra,J.) A.Kumar