IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16401 of 2008 ***** Binod Kumar Singh son of Sri Surya Narayan Singh, resident of village and Post – Barai Patti, P.S. – Yadavpur, District – Gopalganj (Bihar) at present Vice – President of Gopalganj District Non-Formal Education Instructors Association, District – Gopalganj (Bihar) …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna 4. The Director, Primary Education, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna 5. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saran Division, Chapra 6. The District Magistrate/Collector, Gopalganj, District – Gopalganj 7. The District Superintendent of Education, Gopalganj, District – Gopalganj 8. The District Education Officer, Gopalganj, District Gopalganj …. …. Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Nityanand Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Mani Kant Mishra, Government Pleader – XXI ------------ P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ----------- Dated, the 28th November, 2008. We heard the counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lalit Kishore, Additional Advocate General-III for respondents. 2 2. Two fold relief is sought for by the petitioner in the writ petition, namely, (i) that the amendment in Rule 8(ka)(2) in Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006 (for short, ‘Rules, 2006’) by Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment and Conditions of Service) (Amendment) Rules, 2008 (for short, ‘Amendment Rules, 2008’), whereby educational qualification for Panchayat Primary Teachers has been altered from Matric to Intermediate (or equivalent), is unreasonable and, accordingly, the said provision be declared unconstitutional, and (ii) that the maximum age prescribed in the aforesaid Rules be directed to be relaxed in respect of Non-formal Education Instructors. 3. The educational qualification for the Panchayat Primary Teachers initially in the Rules, 2006 was provided as Matric from recognized government schools or equivalent examination. It is true that in the Rules, 2006 for Block Teachers, educational qualification prescribed is higher secondary/intermediate or equivalent. But if, it was felt by the government that educational qualification of intermediate for Panchayat Primary Teacher would serve the better purpose of imparting education to primary students in Panchayat Schools and that minimum educational qualification of intermediate for Panchayat Primary Teachers would be in conformity with the qualifications laid down by the N.C.T.E. for such employment, we fail to understand, how the amended rule could be said to be unreasonable. It is the obligation of the State to impart free 3 and compulsory education to the children between 6 to 14 years, as contemplated under Article 21A of the Constitution of India. By the amendment in the Rules, 2006, the minimum qualification of Panchayat Primary Teachers has been brought on par with the qualification prescribed by the N.C.T.E. We are afraid, such amendment cannot be said to be arbitrary. Moreover in the State, there is no dearth of intermediate qualified candidates (the educational qualification prescribed by the Amendment Rules, 2008). If the counter affidavit of the State is to be believed (and there is no reason to disbelieve it), for filling up 1 lakh vacant post of Panchayat Primary Teachers, 1 crore and 20 lakh applications have been received. That means there is vast pool of intermediate qualified candidates. We are, thus, of the considered view that the educational qualification for the post of Panchayat Primary Teachers prescribed under Amendment Rules, 2008 by changing it from matric to intermediate cannot be held to be unreasonable or unjustified. 4. As regards, relaxation of age to the petitioners who are Non-formal Education Instructors, the stand of the State Government is that they have considered this aspect but it is not feasible to give any relaxation in age. We assume that many of the petitioners may have been working as Non-formal Education Instructors for quite few years and may have become overage for appointment to the post of Panchayat Primary Teachers as per the age prescribed in the rules but relaxation of age to any appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Although, the counsel for the 4 petitioner submitted that by virtue of the circulars issued by the Government of Bihar (Appointment Department) in the year 1959 and 1962, the State Government has power to relax the age, in our considered view, the said two circulars have no application for appointment to the post of Panchayat Primary Teachers. The afore- referred circulars are applicable in respect of appointments in the service of the State Government under diverse recruitment rules; but these circulars have no application to the appointments which are to be made by the local self institutions like Panchayat. In the circumstances, the decision of the government reflected in the counter affidavit that it is not feasible to relax the age also does not seem to us to be unreasonable as they have already received 1 crore 20 lakhs applications for 1 lakh vacant posts of Panchayat Primary Teachers. 5. All in all, we do not find any merit in the writ petition. It is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Pawan/-