IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8151 of 2008 SANDHYA KUMARI, Wife of Sri Sushil Kumar Prasad, Resident of village- Khalilpur, Panchayat-Karjadih, P.O. Pratappur, P.S. Karja, Distt- Muzaffarpur……………………..….Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Principal Secretary , Department of Human Resources Development Bihar, Patna 3. The Secretary , Department of Primary and Adult Education, Bihar, Patna 4. The Deputy Director, Primary Education , Government of Bihar, Patna 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Muzaffarpur, District- Muzaffarpur 6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Kanti-2, District-Muzaffarpur 7. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Karjadih at Karjadih, P.S. Karja, District- Muzaffarpur 8. The Headmaster/ In-charge, Headmaster, Madhya Vidyalaya, Karja, at and P.S. Karja, District-Muzaffarpur 9. The Panchayat Sachiv, Panchayat Raj Karjadih at Karjadih, P.S. Karja, District- Muzaffarpur ……………Respondents. -With- CWJC No.589 of 2009 1. MUNNA THAKUR , son of Sri Pahlad Thakur, resident of village and P.O.-Kalawari, P.S.-Kanti, District-Muzaffarpur 2. Sunita Kumari, wife of Sri Sohan Sharma, resident of village-Tarma, P.O. Kalawari, P.S.-Kanti, District-Muzaffarpur ……………………………..Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Principal Secretary , Department of Human Resources Development Bihar, Patna 3. The Secretary , Department of Primary and Adult Education, Bihar, Patna 4. The Deputy Director, Primary Education , Government of Bihar, Patna 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Muzaffarpur, District- Muzaffarpur 6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Kanti, District-Muzaffarpur 7. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Dhamauli, Ramnath East, Kanti, P.S. Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur 8. The Panchayat Sachiv, Panchayat Raj Dhamauli, Ramnath East, Kanti, P.S. Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur …………………..Respondents. ----------- 2. 19.03.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the state. Prayer of the petitioners in both the writ applications is - 2 - for quashing the impugned orders in their writ applications annexed as Annexures-12 & 13 in C.W.J.C. No. 8151 of 2008 and Annexure-11 in C.W.J.C. No. 589/09. By the impugned orders, petitioners have been terminated from their service of Panchayat teachers and relieved from their posts. Both the petitioners were appointed as Panchayat Shikcha Mitra having qualification of intermediate. Subsequently, they also enhanced their percentage of marks beyond 45 per cent. However, they have been terminated from the service on the ground that at the time of their appointment as Panchayat Shikcha Mitra , they possessed less than 45 per cent marks. Both the petitioners were, subsequently, absorbed on the post of Panchayat teacher as provided under 2006 rules. Petitioners are placing reliance on a decision of this court in C.W.J.C. No. 3572 of 2007 (Sujata Devi @ Sujata Kumari Vs. State of Bihar) where the question relating to appointment on the post of Panchayat Shikcha Mitra having less than 45 per cent marks has been considered and decided. In this very decision, it has been stated that for the appointment on the post of Panchayat Shikcha Mitra , less than 45 per cent marks is not relevant as the State Government itself has taken a decision by the order dated 04.07.2008 contained in Memo No. 2517 whereby it has been held that even Matriculate who has been selected as Panchayat Shikcha Mitra securing less - 3 - than 45 per cent marks in the intermediate examination will be continued in service and thus whose service have been terminated on this ground that they had secured less 45 per cent marks in the intermediate examination, will be reinstated in service. This policy decision as well as the decision contained in C.W.J.C. No. . 3572/07 duly covers facts and relief prayed for, by the petitioners in both writ applications. Accordingly, the impugned orders contained in Annexures 12 & 13 in C.W.J.C. No. 8151/08 and Annexure-11 in C.W.J.C. No. 589/09, are quashed. Both writ applications are allowed. Respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioners. The petitioners will be deemed to be in continuous service. The period during which they were restrained from discharging their duties on account of impugned orders, will also be treated as their continuous service. Accordingly, petitioners are entitled for salary for that period as well as consequential benefits for this period. The respondents are directed to make payment of arrears of salary to the petitioners within eight weeks from the date of production/communication of the order. Writ applications are allowed. AKV/ (Mridula Mishra,J.)