IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3416 of 2008 Sunil Kumar Das, son of Sri Ram Deo Das, resident of village Murliganj (Opp. Veterinary Hospital), Ward No.7, P.O. & P.S. Murliganj, District- Madhepura. …………… Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar through Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.The District Magistrate, Madhepura 3.The District Superintendent of Education, Madhepura …………… Respondents ----------- 4. 05/07/2011 The present petitioner was one of the petitioners in C.W.J.C.No.963 of 2007 filed before this Court for consideration of their cases for appointment as Panchayat Teachers. Their case was that they had obtained valid Degree of Training from the Institutions of Calcutta and that should be treated as equivalent to Teachers Training Degree of the Institutions of the State of Bihar. The present petitioner claims to have obtained Degree from one Oxford College of Education, Calcutta. The writ application of the petitioners was disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file representation before the authorities for consideration of their cases. Accordingly, they filed representation, which has been considered and rejected by Annexure-5, which is impugned in 2 this writ application. Representation of the petitioner has been rejected primarily on the ground that the Oxford College of Education, Calcutta is not a recognized Institution in the State of Bihar, therefore, the Degree issued from that College cannot be treated as valid for consideration of case of the petitioner and others for their appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to certain orders and judgments of this Court in support of his case. He has referred to one order dated 18.12.1997 passed in C.W.J.C.No.8829 of 1989 by a Division bench. This order shows that the case of the writ petitioner of the case had been rejected by the respondents on the ground that the Degree had been obtained from West Bengal. The Division Bench held that mere obtaining Degree from another State cannot debar the petitioner from appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner has thereafter referred to an order of the Division Bench dated 10.9.2008 passed in L.P.A.No.66 of 2008, which was preferred against an order dated 17.9.2007 passed in C.W.J.C.No.11934 of 2007. The order passed in 3 the writ matter shows that the learned single Judge had dismissed the writ application of the petitioner, who had claimed to have obtained Degree from Oxford College of Education, Calcutta, on the ground that the Institution had not been recognized by the State of Bihar. The Division Bench disposed of the L.P.A. giving the appellants liberty to file representation before the competent authority claiming that the training undertaken by them meets the eligibility for the purpose of appointment to the post of Assistant Teachers. The Division Bench directed the authorities to consider the representation and dispose it of in accordance with law and the relevant rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to an order of the Division Bench passed in the case of Shiv Narayan Thakur Vs. State of Bihar, reported in 2009(3) PLJR 398. From the order of the Division Bench it appears that the writ application was dismissed by learned single Judge by the order impugned in the L.P.A. on the ground that the Institution from where petitioner had obtained Certificate of Teachers Training had not been 4 included in the list of N.C.T.E. The Division Bench found that the petitioner had, in fact, obtained the training prior to coming into force of the N.C.T.E. Act and therefore, non- inclusion of name of the Institution in the list of the Council should not be a ground for rejection of his case. The Division bench also noticed that the persons having obtained Degree from the said Institution were working in the Jharkhand State. The matter was, therefore, remitted back to learned single Judge to consider and decide afresh. Learned counsel for the petitioner lastly referred to a judgment of a Division bench in the case of Sri Mahendra Prasad Mehta Vs. District Superintendent of Education, Katihar, reported in 1985 PLJR 709. This Division Bench Judgment also shows that the Court did not accept the plea of the respondents that a Degree/Certificate obtained from an Institution outside the State itself debars a candidate from consideration for his appointment. The orders, as referred to by learned counsel for the petitioner and noticed above, show that the Degree obtained from any 5 Institution outside the State of Bihar or from anywhere in the country cannot be itself a ground for rejection of candidature of a candidate for consideration of his case. If the eligibility requires Teachers Training Certificate, valid certificate obtained by a candidate from any Institution has to be accepted as fulfilling the eligibility criteria. But the question is not of equivalence of Certificates. Question is of recognition of the Institution from which Certificate was obtained. Under the N.C.T.E. Act, a Council has been established for centralized monitoring of Teachers Training Institutions. After the Council has been set up, recognition granted by it to any Institution running anywhere in the country has to be accepted as conclusive and no State Government can object to the validity of the certificates issued from such Institutions. However, prior to the setting up of the Council under the Act, the State Government had exclusive jurisdiction to recognize or not to recognize the Degree of a particular Institution. The Degree issued by any Institution outside the State ipso facto could 6 not be accepted as binding on other States. For accepting a Degree as a valid Degree from any particular Institution, it was necessary that the said Institution must be recognized by that State where the candidate is making a claim for appointment or admission on the basis of such a Degree. It is not denied that this Oxford College of Education, Calcutta was not a recognized Institution in the State of Bihar prior to N.C.T.E. Act came into force. In the circumstances, even if the said Institution was an affiliated and/or recognized Institution in the West Bengal, the said recognition by the West Bengal Government cannot be held recognized in the State of Bihar unless the Bihar Government by a conscious decision accepted the Institution as validly recognized for the purpose of appointment or admission on the basis of degrees granted by the said Institution in the State of Bihar. That fact is not established in this case. Thus, this Court finds that the respondents have validly rejected the claim of the petitioner. As a result, this Court does not find any merit in the writ application. 7 The same is accordingly dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as a policy decision the State of Bihar is appointing untrained teachers also due to shortage of trained teachers. Hence, he submits that the petitioner, who has at least obtained a Teachers Training Certificate from outside the State, should also be considered by the State of Bihar, if not in the category of trained candidates, then at least in the category of untrained teacher or candidate having obtained certificate of training from outside the State. This is a matter of policy decision by the State Government and this Court cannot issue any mandamus in that regard. Petitioner, if so advised, may approach the State authorities and convince them with regard to the genuineness of his Certificate and his eligibility for consideration in the matter. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)