IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10695 of 2009 1. VEDMALA KUMARI WIFE OF SHRI VIJAY KUMAR, JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BELDARA, P.O. LALPUR, VIA GANPATGANJ, P.S. PIPRA BAZAR, DISTRICT SUPAUL 2. LALIT KUMAR, SON OF JAGAT LAL MANDAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND POST BHAIROPATTI, P.S. TRIVENIGANJ DISTRICT SUPAUL 3. BIJENDRA KUMAR, SON OF JAGESHWAR PRASAD YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND POST KOPARIA, P.S. TRIVENIGANJ, DISTRICT SUPAUL------PETITIONERS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS For the petitioners:- Mr. Pramod Mishra For State:- AC to GA VII 2 9.10.2009 Heard Counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing for the State. Petitioners were initially appointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitras and subsequently absorbed on the post of Panchayat teachers under the provisions of Rule 20(II) of the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers’ (Appointment of Service Conditions) Rules, 2006. A circular was issued by the Principal SecretaryHuman Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna that all those Panchayat Teachers, earlier working on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra and subsequently absorbed as Panchayat Teachers, if had less than 45% marks in the Intermediate examination, should be terminated from the service, as 45% marks in the intermediate is the minimum requisite qualification for appointment on the post of Panchayat/Prakhand teacher. Some of the Panchayat/Prakhand Teachers, who were terminated from service, on the basis of circular of the H.R.D. Department, filed writ applications in the High Court, - 2 - challenging the termination order. Finally CWJC No. 7490 of 2008 and analogous cases were heard and decided by order dated 7.5.2008. The order of the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna was quashed and it was held that since at the time of the petitioners’ appointment there was no such guidelines which was subsequently issued, as such under the changed conditions imposed through this letter for testing the legality and genuineness of the appointment of the teachers is illegal and arbitrary. Persons earlier appointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra and absorbed as Panchayat Teacher cannot be terminated on such grounds. Considering the direction of this Court, whereby order terminating petitioners’ appointment was held illegal, they were reinstated on their respective posts. The petitioners in the present writ application were also terminated and subsequently reinstated in the light of High Court’s order. Petitioners on account of termination had remained out of service for the period 7.11.2007 to 9.8.2008. On being reinstated, they represented for payment of their arrears of salary for the period of termination, which has been rejected by the order contained in Memo no.808 dated 28.5.2009 issued by the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna on the ground that for the period the petitioners have not worked they are not entitled for salary on the principle of “no work no pay.” Admitted fact is that if the petitioners have not - 3 - worked for the period of termination, for that they are not responsible. They were restrained from discharging their duties on account of illegal and improper orders issued by the respondents. In case the salary is not paid to the petitioners it will adversely affect their career as well, it will amount as breakage in the service. This gap period will also affect their future prospects as well as seniority. Accordingly, The Principal Secretary, H.R.D. Department, Govt. of Bihar, and the respondent no.5 the District Superintendent of Education, Supaul is specifically directed to make payment of salary to the petitioners for the period of termination. Payment of salary must be made to the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from the date of production/communication of a copy of this order. The writ application stands allowed. (Mridula Mishra,J.) A.Kumar