IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.933 of 2011 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11868 of 2010 ====================================================== Rupam Kumari, wife of Sri Kamlesh Sharma, Resident of Village Uchirma, Police Station Sherghati and District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. District Magistrate, District-Gaya. 3. District Superintendent of Education, Gaya. 4. Block Education Extension Officer, Sherghati, District-Gaya. 5. District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Gaya through its Member 6. Mukhiya, Chitab Kala Panchayat, Block Sherghati, District Gaya. .... .... Rspondents/Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate with Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Harendra Pd. Singh, G.A.-8 with Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, A.C. to G.A.-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 4. 15-07-2011 This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is preferred by the writ petitioner against the judgment and order Patna High Court LPA No.933 of 2011 (4) dt.15-07-2011 2 / 4 2 dated 29th March 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in the above C.W.J.C. No. 11868 of 2010. In the above writ petition the appellant challenged the order dated 10th March 2010 made by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Gaya in Case No.726/2009. She claimed the right to appointment as Panchayat Shikshak pursuant to her appointment as Shiksha Mitra made on 17th May 2005. By order dated 16th May 2005 made by the Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Chitap Kala, Block-Sherghati, District-Gaya the appellant was appointed as Shiksha Mitra for a period of 11 months. Upon enquiry by the Block Education Extension Officer the appointment of the appellant and other Shiksha Mitras made by the Gram Panchayat, Chitap Kala were found to be illegal. The appointment of two of the said teachers was also found to be made on the basis of forged documents. On expiry of the period of appointment for 11 months the appellant was not re-employed or continued in service as Shiksha Mitra. On perusal of the records, it appears that the appellant continued to pursue her case with the Block Education Extension Officer, Sherghati. The said Officer made a recommendation that as the appointment of one Reeta Kumari and one Sangeeta Kumari was found to be made on forged documents the service of the appellant could be regularized in place of the said Reeta Kumari and Sangeeta Kumari. The said recommendation was not acted upon. After the expiry of period of 11 months the appellant was not continued or reemployed as Shiksha Mitra. On 1st July 2006, under the powers conferred by Article 243 of the Constitution and Sections 47 and 48 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006, the Government of Bihar framed Bihar Patna High Court LPA No.933 of 2011 (4) dt.15-07-2011 3 / 4 3 Panchayat Elementary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2006’). Under the said Rules of 2006 the elementary school teachers in the State of Bihar were classified in two categories, the Prakhand Teachers at the Block level and the Panchayat Teachers at the Gram Panchayat level. Rule 4 of the said Rules of 2006 provides for selection of Prakhand Teachers and Panchayat Teachers by a selection committee constituted in consonance with Clause (1) and (2) of the said Rule 4. Rule 8 thereof provides for eligibility of Prakhand Teachers and Panchayat Teachers. Rule 20 thereof provides for repeal and saving. Clause (i) thereof provides, inter alia, that effective from the date of the said Rules all rules, regulations, resolutions, orders, instructions etc. issued in respect of employment of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra shall be deemed to have been repealed. Clause (ii) thereof saves the employment of teachers and their service conditions made in consonance with the prevalent rules, resolutions, orders, instructions etc. Clause (iii) thereof provides that the Panchayat Shiksha Mitra appointed in accordance with the relevant circular, order, instruction and working as such shall be deemed to have been appointed as Panchayat Teacher under the said Rules of 2006. The effect of the above repeal and saving would be that after 1st July 2006 (effective date of the Rules of 2006) all circulars, orders, resolutions etc. issued in respect of employment as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra shall be rendered ineffective and no further appointment of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra can be made. Those Panchayat Shiksha Mitra who were performing duty as on 1st July 2006 are deemed to be the Panchayat Teachers employed Patna High Court LPA No.933 of 2011 (4) dt.15-07-2011 4 / 4 4 under the Rules of 2006. Indisputably, the appellant’s service came to an end on expiry of 11 months from 17th May 2005 in accordance with the terms of her appointment. On 1st July 2006 she was not in actual service as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. She, therefore, cannot be deemed to have been appointed as Panchayat Teacher under the Rules of 2006 nor can her claim for appointment as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra be accepted after 1st July 2006. For appointment as Panchayat Teacher under the Rules of 2006 the appellant is required to undergo the selection procedure prescribed under Rule 9 of the Rules of 2006. Considering the aforesaid legal provisions the appellate authority rejected the claim of the appellant. The learned single Judge has upheld the order of the appellate authority. In view of the aforesaid legal provisions, we see no substance in the claim made by the appellant. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. Pawan Kumar/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)