IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10203 of 2007 MADAN PASWAN CWJC No.7293 of 2007 RAM CHANDRA RAI W i t h CWJC No.8496 of 2007 NITISH ANURAG W i t h CWJC No.6083 of 2007 KUMUD KUMARI W i t h CWJC No.3741 of 2008 AMIT KUMAR &ORS W i t h CWJC No.10131 of 2008 AMOD KUMAR YADAV W i t h CWJC No.4240 of 2008 SATYENDRA PATEL & ORS W i t h CWJC No.6354 of 2008 BHOLA SAH & ANR W i t h CWJC No.10724 of 2007 AMRESH KUMAR W i t h CWJC No.12940 of 2007 AJAY KUMAR RANJAN W i t h CWJC No.8037 of 2007 PRATIBHA SINHA W i t h CWJC No.16716 of 2007 ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA W i t h CWJC No.5926 of 2007 ASHWINI KUMAR ROY CWJC No.6850 of 2007 SHYAM KUMAR W i t h CWJC No.15775 of 2007 PUNAM KUMARI W i t h CWJC No.8315 of 2008 SHYAM SAGAR W i t h CWJC No.8411 of 2008 BIRENDRA KUMAR SINHA W i t h CWJC No.16037 of 2007 - 2 - SONAM W i t h CWJC No.5692 of 2008 ARVIND KUMAR SINGH W i t h CWJC No.5562 of 2008 MANISH KUMAR W i t h THE STATE OF BIHAR &ORS ----------- 3 21.08.2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State in this batch of writ applications. The petitioners were appointed as Panchayat Teachers in the Primary Schools to teach students from Class-1 to 5 for which the academic qualification stipulated under an advertisement was Higher Secondary/ Intermediate. There are no allegations of any irregularities or illegalities in the selection process neither are there any allegations against the petitioners in their discharge of duties. After they were appointed and started to discharge their duties as teachers imparting education, an issue was sought to be raised with regard to legality of their appointment inasmuch as they possessed Intermediate qualification in a vocational course, as distinct from a regular Intermediate Course and - 3 - were thus ineligible for appointment under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006, more particularly Rule-8 of the same. Their appointment was then terminated compelling them to approach this Court. The eligibility for appointment was sought to be assessed after appointment. There was a decision of the respondents themselves dated 30.4.2007 and of the Bihar Intermediate Council dated 4.9.2007 that Intermediate qualification in a vocational course was equivalent to that in a regular Intermediate Course. The orders of termination were then set aside by this Court of similarly situated persons in C.W.J.C. No.1631/07 on 18.4.2007. The State thought it prudent to question the same in Civil Review No.146/07 which also came to be rejected on 30.4.2008. L.P.A. No.600/08 against the same was also dismissed on 19.8.2008. In the meantime, against the decision in C.W.J.C. No.1631/2000 another L.P.A. was preferred by the State numbered as 538/08 which was also dismissed on 19.8.2008. Following the decision in C.W.J.C. - 4 - No.1631/07 similar orders were passed in C.W.J.C. No.4878/07 and analogous cases on 19.2.2008 against which L.P.A. No.469/08 was dismissed on 18.7.2008. Notwithstanding all of the aforesaid, the State still contests the matter to justify the orders of termination for similar grounds. The petitioners were appointed as teachers to impart education. The status of a teacher in the Indian society is one of reverence. A person procuring appointment has an enthusiasm. They were to be part of a nation building process by imparting education to the torch bearers of the next generation. Before this could happen, they found themselves thrown out for no fault of theirs. Several of such persons came to this Court and as noticed above, orders have been passed holding the action of the respondents to be illegal. This Court is informed that there are a large number of writ applications pending before this Court on this issue. The Court would have thought that after the orders of this Court, as noticed above, the State respondents would have realized their folly and gracefully withdrawn - 5 - the present orders of termination. Unfortunately, that has not happened. The frivolity of contesting cases at the tax payers’ expense for no rhyme or reason continues unabated. The Court is being saddled with totally, now, unwarranted litigations. A far more important issue to this Court is the attitude of the teachers who would now re-enter the class room after having fought a successful battle in the court room during a period they should have been in the class room imparting education. What shall be their attitude? Shall it be one of cynicism? Will he come back to the class room with the same enthusiasm with which he entered originally or will he now be whiling his time? It is this cynical teacher who would now be imparting education to the next generation citizens. The colossal waste of resources by reason of the termination orders and the equally colossal loss of man-hours for a nation of scarce resources are, perhaps issues which are of no relevance to those who administer the orders of termination. Once the issue of a vocational - 6 - Intermediate qualification being equivalent to an Intermediate qualification has been decided and tested in appeal and the observations in the present order, this Court hopes and trusts that the State shall forthwith proceed to recall such orders of termination without requiring each individual terminated to bring individual orders in his writ application casting a wholly unnecessary burden on the Courts. This Court can do no better than to quote from the relevant extract of paragraph 29 of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in (2006) 2 Supreme Court Cases 747 (STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS Versus C.LALITHA). 29. “Service jurisprudence evolved by this Court from time to time postulates that all persons similarly situated should be treated similarly. Only because one person has approached the Court that would not mean that persons similarly situated should be treated differently”…… To the same effect is the observation of the Supreme Court in paragraph-16 of the judgement reported in (2006) 9 Supreme Court Cases 406 (K.T.VEERAPPA AND OTHERS Versus STATE - 7 - OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS). 16. “The defence of the State Government that as the appellants were not the petitioners in the writ petition filed by 23 employees of the respondent University to whom the benefit of revised pay scales was granted by the Court, the appellants are estopped from raising their claim of revised pay scales in the year 1992-94, is wholly unjustified, patently irrational, arbitrary and discriminatory. As noticed in the earlier part of this judgment, revised pay scales were given to those 23 employees in the year 1991 when the contempt proceedings were initiated against the Vice- Chancellor and the Registrar of the University of Mysore. The benefits having been given to 23 employees of the University in compliance with the decision dated 21-6-1989 recorded by the learned Single Judge in WPs Nos.21487-506 of 1982, it was expected that without resorting to any of the methods the other employees identically placed, including the appellants, would have been given the same benefits, which would have avoided not only unnecessary litigation but also the movement of files and papers which only waste public time.” Before parting with this order, it is necessary to qualify that while passing orders of such reinstatement the State shall have the liberty to examine, if it bona fide believes that there may be issues other than as discussed above in an individual case which, - 8 - perhaps, require different treatment. This Court, therefore, considers it proper to make an observation herein that as and when any individual writ petitioner whose writ petition is pending before this Court on the issue of vocational intermediate qualification leading to non-consideration of his case by the respondents or termination of their services files a representation before them along with a copy of the present order, the respondents are obliged to consider the representation and act in accordance with law within a maximum period of two months from the date of its receipt/production along with a copy of this order, upon pain of answerability for inaction despite the present order. The petitioners are directed to be reinstated forthwith with all arrears of salary for the period that they have been kept out of service. Any appointment made in the meantime on the posts held by the petitioners from which they were terminated shall naturally have to abide by the present final order. The situation is the creation of the respondents and it is - 9 - for them to find the solution. The writ applications stand allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha,J )