IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15458 of 2009 RABINDRA PRASAD SINGH S/O LATE DEO NANDAN SINGH R/O VILL.- KHORA, P.O. KONHIA, P.S. MESHARIYA, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN PRESENTLY POSTED AS ACTING HEADMASTER, GOVERNMENT MIDDLE SCHOOL BARBAT SENA, BETIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, BETIAH 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, BETIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN 5. THE AREA EDUCATION OFFICER, BETIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN 6. RADHA KANT VERMA S/O LATE GAURI SHANKAR PRASAD VERMA R/O BANU HAPAR, BETIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN AT PRESENT POSTED AS ASSTT. TEACHER, GOVT. MIDDLE SCHOOL, BARBAT SENA BETIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN. ----------- 3 06.05.2010 I.A. No. 3341 of 2010. Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing for the State. Initially, the interlocutory application, filed by respondent No. 6, was being considered for vacating the order of stay dated 25.02.2010, whereby operation of order dated 13.07.2009, passed by the District Superintendent of Education, West Champaran (Respondent No. 4), had been stayed. The respondent No. 4 by order dated 13.07.2009 (Annexure-1) had directed the petitioner to hand over charge of acting Headmaster of Government Middle School, Barwat Sena, Bettiah, West Champaran, to respondent No. 6, within 24 hours or otherwise the departmental proceeding will be initiated against him. Both, the petitioner and respondent No. 6 are claiming to be senior to each other and thus entitled to discharge duties as Acting Headmaster of the School. The facts revealed in the writ application as well as in the counter affidavits filed by the respondent No. 6 and the - 2 - respondent-State, is clear that initially on superannuation of permanent Headmaster, respondent No. 6 being senior, was made In-charge Headmaster of the school, but, on account of his wife’s ailments, he showed his inability in discharging duties of In- charge Headmaster, for some time. In this circumstance, the petitioner was made In-charge Headmaster of the school by the order of the District Superintendent of Education. Subsequently, when respondent No. 6 came back, the petitioner was not ready to hand over the charge to respondent No. 6. In this regard, orders and counter orders were issued by the District Superintendent of Education, Area Education Officer and District Education Officer. Finally, the impugned order has been issued by the District Superintendent of Education, directing the petitioner to hand over charge to respondent No. 6. Petitioner, claims to be senior to respondent No. 6 in all respects, be it the date of appointment, date of promotion in the B.Sc. Trained Scale or in day to day transaction, orders passed by different authorities in his favour, so far his seniority is concerned. On the other hand, respondent No. 6, states that he is seniormost teacher, having educational qualification of B.Sc /B.Ed., as well as promotion in Graduate Trained Scale w.e.f. 22.12.1995. Petitioner, as per his own admission, in para 6 of the writ application, is in Matric Trained Scale. In the counter affidavit filed by the State, respondent No. 6 has been considered senior to the petitioner. It has also been - 3 - stated that the petitioner was appointed against the post of I.Sc. Trained teacher in the Elementary School on 22.1.1975. At the time of appointment education qualification was B.S.C. (Hons.) untrained. He did Dip-in-tech. education on 22.04.1982, during his service tenure. The Dip-in-Tech. degree is not recognized as equivalent to B.Ed. degree thus from the date of passing of this teacher training, the petitioner was given I.Sc. Trained teacher’s scale. The Respondent No. 6, was upgraded under Bihar Taken Over Elementary School Teacher’s Promotion Rules, 1993, w.e.f. 22.12.1995 and given promotion in graduate (Science) trained scale. Since, Dip-in-teaching is not considered a requisite degree for being promoted in trained category, it affected the seniority of the petitioner and he stood junior to respondent No. 6. The counter affidavit of the State, has settled the controversy regarding seniority in between petitioner and respondent No. 6, for the present, till the date final gradation list in this regard is prepared, as per the direction of the Full Bench. Since, petitioner is junior to respondent No. 6, as such on superannuation of the permanent Headmaster, the respondent No. 6 was made in-charge Headmaster, but due to some personal difficulty, respondent No. 6 did not assume charge of in-charge Headmaster and petitioner being next in seniority was temporarily allowed to act as in-charge Headmaster. On account of this temporary arrangement, petitioner cannot claim his entitlement for acting as in-charge headmaster. - 4 - Prayer of the petitioner for quashing of the order dated 13.07.2009 is rejected. Order of stay granted on 25.02.2010 is vacated. Respondent No. 6, as informed is already discharging the duties of in-charge headmaster, he will continue, till the permanent Headmaster is posted in the school. This writ application is rejected. Sanjeet/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)