IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10052 of 2009 MEERA KUMARI, WIFE OF GAUTAM PODDAR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-TILRATH, POLICE STATION-BARAUNI, DISTRICT- BEGUSARAI ……………. PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt of Bihar, Patna 2. The District Magistrate, Begusarai. 3. The District Superintendent of Education-cum-District Programme Coordinator Project, Begusarai, Bihar. 4. The Block Development Officer, Barauni Block, District-Begusarai. 5. The Mukhiya, Tilrath, Gram Panchayat, P.S. Barauni, District- Begusarai. 6. Panchayat Secretary, Tilrath, Gram Panchayat, P.S. Barauni, District- Begusarai. 7. The Headmastger, Government Primary School, Tilrath Police Station- Barauni, District-Begusarai. …………….. ………….. Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner: Dr. Amrendra Kumar For the State: Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, S.C.-22 Mr. Sanjay Kumar Kaplana 2. 10.09.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the state. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 15.05.2008 issued in pursuance to order contained in Memo No. 17 dated 18.12.2007. By the impugned order, the petitioner who was working as teacher in Primary School, Tilrath, has been terminated from the service. Petitioner has also prayed for a direction to the authorities to make payment of her salary after her reinstatement as also for the period, for which she has remained out of service on account of issuance of the impugned order. Petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Shikcha Mitra in the year, 2003 on the basis of her Madhyama degree which - 2 - is equivalent to matriculation. Subsequently, since the qualification of Panchayat Shikcha Mitra was enhanced as per the guidelines of the Government of year, 2004 , the petitioner also enhanced her qualification by acquiring degree of Uttar Madhyama in 2007 which is equivalent to intermediate. Petitioner, after coming into force of Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Appointment & Service Condition) Rules, 2006, was absorbed on the post of Panchayat Shikchak under the provisions of rule 20(iii) of 2006 Rules. Petitioner continued to discharge her duties and she was paid her salary but suddenly, she has been terminated from service w.e.f. 05.01.2008 in pursuance of a letter issued by the Human Resources Department, Govt of Bihar as contained in Memo No. 3529 dated 12.10.2007 whereby a direction was issued that all such Panchayat Shikcha Mitras (absorbed as Panchayat Teachers) appointed on the post having less than 45 per cent marks in the intermediate, should not be absorbed on the post. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the District Superintendent of Education-cum-District Programme-Co- ordinator, District Education Project, Begusarai, in the light of the letter issued by the Human Resources Development Department, issued a guideline to all Panchayat Secretaries and teachers for following the guidelines of the government. The letter issued by District Superintendent of Education, Begusarai was wrongly interpreted by the Panchayat Secretary - 3 - and Mukhiya and termination order has been issued in favour of the petitioner on 15.05.2008. Before issuing the termination order, the Mukhiya/Panchayat Secretary failed to consider that petitioner has passed Uttar Madhyama examination with 50 per cent marks which is higher than the required 45 per cent marks. Further, counsel for the petitioner submits that after issuance of the government letter issued by the Human Resources Development Department, this issue has already been considered by the High Court and it has been decided that the persons who have already been absorbed under the provisions of 2006 rule, even though having less than 45 per cent marks in the intermediate examination, can be absorbed on the post as any circulars or guidelines of the Government cannot be made effective retrospective, in any case, it could have only prospective effect. Persons who were appointed earlier to the issuance of those guidelines should not have been terminated from their service on the basis of government circulars. I find much substance in the submissions of the counsel appearing for the petitioner and this has already been decided by this court in C.W.J.C. No. 3700 of 2009 (Indu Devi Vs The State of Bihar & Ors.) relying on the order passed by the High Court in L.P.A. No. 940 of 2007, the order dated 15.05.2008 issued by the Headmaster of Primary School, Tilrath, in pursuance of Memo No. 17 dated 18.12.2007 issued by the Mukhiya/Panchayat Secretary and the concerned Gram - 4 - Panchayat is quashed. Respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to join her post. Since the petitioner was terminated illegally by the respondents, due to which she could not discharge her duties for the period 05.01.2008 till the date, she cannot be asked to remain deprived of the monetary benefits for all these periods. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits. akv (Mridula Mishra, J.)