IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO. 3035 OF 2009 SHASHI BHUSHAN ROY, SON OF SRI VIJAY BAHADUR ROY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-KHALWA POLICE STATION NAUTAN DISTRICT-SIWAN ……………….. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER- CUM-SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SIWAN 3. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SIWAN 4. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER NAUTAN (MAIRWA), SIWAN 5. BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER NAUTAN (MAIRWA), SIWAN 6. MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ KHALWA, DISTRICT- SIWAN 7. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ KHALWA, DISTRICT-SIWAN 8. MITHILESH KUMAR SINGH, SON OF LATE NATHUNI SINGH RESIDENT OF KHAT NARYANPUR P.O. SHAHPUR POLICE STATION NAUTAN DISTRICT – SIWAN ………………. RESPONDENTS WITH CWJC NO.2587 OF 2008 MITHLESH KUMAR SINGH, SON OF LATE NATHUNI SINGH RESIDENT OF KHAT NARYANPUR P.O. SHAHPUR POLICE STATION NAUTAN DISTRICT – SIWAN ……………….. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SIWAN 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SIWAN 4. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, MAIRWA, P.O.+P.S.-MAIRWA, DISTRICT-SIWAN 5. THE HEADMASTER, GOVERNMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL, EAST KHALWA, P.O.-EAST KHALWA, P.S. – MARIWA, DISTRICT – SIWAN ……………… RESPONDENTS WITH CWJC NO.1519 OF 2010 MITHILESH KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE NATHUNI SINGH R/O VILLAGE - KHATNARAYANPUR, P.S NAUTAN, DISTRICT- SIWAN ……………. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT TEACHER EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY, SIWAN 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, DISTRICT- SIWAN 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NAUTAN DISTRICT- SIWAN 2 5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, NAUTAN DISTRICT- SIWAN 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NAUTAN, DISTRICT- SIWAN 7. GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ KHAILAWAN, P.S- SHAHPUR, VIA- KHAILAWAN, DISTRICT- SIWAN, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY 8. MUKHIYA GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ KHAILAWAN, P.O- SHAHPUR, VIA- KHAILAWAN, DISTRICT- SIWAN 9. SHASHI BHUSHAN RAI R/O SRI VIJAY BAHADUR RAI R/O VILL-KHAILAWAN, P.S NAUTAN, DISTRICT- SIWAN ……………… RESPONDENTS ----------- IN C.W.J.C. NO. 3035 OF 2009 FOR THE PETITIONER: MR. ANIL KUMAR JHA, SR. ADV. MR. UDAY BHAN SINGH, ADV. FOR THE STATE: MR. BIJAY KUMAR SINHA, AC TO AAG-IX IN C.W.J.C. NO. 2587 OF 2008 & C.W.J.C. NO. 1519 OF 2010 FOR THE PETITIONER: MR. RAJENDRA PRASAD SINGH, SR. ADVOCATE FOR THE STATE: MR. SUBHASH PRASAD SINGH, GA-7 FOR PRIVATE RESPONDENTS: MR. ANIL KUMAR JHA, SR. ADVOCATE MR. UDAY BHAN SINGH, ADVOCATE ***** 05. 29.07.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the State. Relief sought for by the petitioners in all three Writ Applications are interlinked, as such the Writ Applications were heard together and being disposed of by a common Order. Mithilesh Kumar Singh, petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 1519 of 2010 and C.W.J.C. No. 2587 of 2008, has filed these Writ Applications for direction to Respondent Authorities for making payment of his salary for the period in between 16.08.2005 and 18.06.2006, that is 3 the period during which he had worked on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in Government Primary Girls School, East Khalwa under Khlawa Gram Panchayat within the district of Siwan. C.W.J.C. No. 1519 of 2010 has been field by the same petitioner, Mithilesh Kumar Singh for quashing of Order dated 31.10.2009 passed by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Siwan in Appeal Case No. 43 of 2009, rejecting his claim for payment of salary on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra / Panchayat Teacher with a finding that he had never been appointed on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in the year 2005, as such he can not claim for payment of salary and be absorbed on the post of Panchayat Teacher under the provisions of Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Employment and Service Condition) Rules, 2006. Appellate Tribunal had recorded a finding that Shashi Bhushan Roy petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 3035 of 2009 had validly been appointed on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in the year 2005 and he has been absorbed on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra after coming into force of 2006 Rules. Writ Application, bearing C.W.J.C. No. 3035 of 2009 has been filed by Shashi Bhushan Roy and his prayer is for a direction to make payment of arrears of 4 honorarium for the period 01.07.2005 to 31.05.2006 for 11 months, when he was working as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra and for payment of arrears of salary after being absorbed as Panchayat Teacher in terms of provisions under Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Employment and Service Condition) Rules, 2006. So far the prayer regarding payment of arrears of salary of Shashi Bhushan Roy and Mithilesh Kumar Singh is concerned that will be subject to the Order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1519 of 2010, where the Order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is under challenge. There is no dispute with respect to this fact that Shashi Bhushan Roy was initially engaged as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in Khalwa Gram Panchayat on 12.02.2003 and also got extension for further 11 months on 01.07.2004. The dispute relates to third extension period on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, as Shashi Bhushan Roy and Mithilesh Kumar Singh both are claiming to be engaged during this period on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. Case of Shashi Bhushan Roy is that he was given third extension on 26.05.2005 and gave his joining on 01.07.2005. In support of his claim documents have been annexed to show that meeting of Sukh Suvidha 5 Committee was held on 26.05.2005, in which his name as well as name of some other persons were considered. But so far Mithilesh Kumar Singh is concerned, he was neither an applicant nor his name was considered by Sukh Suvidha Committee. The resolution of Sukh Suvidha Committee was passed on the same date and Shashi Bhushan Roy was given third extension on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, on which he joined on 01.07.2005. Mithilesh Kumar Singh, who was holding the post of Up-Mukhiya for five years, staring from 2001 to 2006, claims that he resigned from the post by submitting his resignation on 26.05.2005, filed his application for being engaged as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. Meeting of Sukh Suvidha Committee was held on 05.08.2005. He was selected and appointment letter was issued in his favour on 15.08.2005 and he gave his joining on 16.08.2005. It has also been submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that since Shashi Bhushan Roy and Mithilesh Kumar Singh both started claiming their honorarium for the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, as such an enquiry was directed to be conducted. The District Magistrate, Siwan himself conducted an enquiry in which all persons connected with the appointment 6 were noticed. On perusal of the notings of District Magistrate, Siwan, during enquiry, it transpires that the District Magistrate did not reach to any conclusion as the Panchayat Secretary and Mukhiya of the concerned Gram Panchayat denied their signature on the appointment letter of Mithilesh Kumar Singh. Their stand was that he had never applied for the post. It had also been stated by the Mukhiya and the Panchayat Secretary, who were members of the Sukh Suvidha Committee, that resignation letter of Mithilesh Kumar Singh, resigning from the post of Up-Mukhiya, was never received by them and it was never accepted. This dispute was still continuing and by that time, 2006 Appointment Rules was amended. Amended 2008 Rules provides for statutory Appellate Authority, for resolving such dispute. The dispute in between Mithilesh Kumar Singh and Shashi Bhushan Roy was referred to the Appellate Authority, which was numbered as Appeal No. 43 of 2009. The Appellate Authority considered all documents, but so far resignation letter of Mithilesh Kumar Singh is concerned, that was not brought before Appellate Forum. The Appellate Forum considered the report submitted by the Block Education Officer, which has been annexed as Annexure - 13 to the Writ 7 Application filed by Shashi Bhushan Roy, which indicates that the resignation letter of Mithilesh Kumar Singh was neither produced nor accepted. There was no application filed on behalf of Mithlilesh Kumar Singh for being appointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. Signature of Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary on the appointment letter of Mithilesh Kumar Singh was denied by Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary. The period during which third extension to the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra was being considered by Sukh Suvidha Committee, Mithilesh Kumar Singh was still holding the post of Up-Mukhiya. On considering of all connected documents and the materials brought before it, the Appellate Authority came to a finding that Mithilesh Kumar Singh was never appointed on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, as such he is not entitled for any arrears of salary. Shashi Bhushan Roy was duly appointed, as he had been given the third extension on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. He discharged his duties continuously on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, as such entitled for arrears of salary. Counsel appearing for Mithilesh Kumar Singh has submitted that Shashi Bhushan Roy having qualification of Matriculation was not eligible for being 8 considered for third extension, as had not enhanced his qualification upto Intermediate. The Intermediate result of Shashi Bhushan Rai being published in 2007, in the year 2005, he could not have been considered eligible for extension for the third time, for the post of Panchayat Siksha Mitra. I find that all these objections can not change the merit of the case of either Mithilesh Kumar Singh or Shashi Bhushan Roy. The anomalous position, which was created on account of the amendment in the guidelines for appointment of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra relating to educational qualification, has been clarified in L.P.A. No. 940 of 2007 whereby Panchayat Siksha Mitra, having matriculation qualification had been allowed 33 months time for enhancement of their qualification. In the light of the Judgment and Order passed by L.P.A. Bench, Panchayat Siksha Mitra terminated from the post on the ground having no requisite qualification, were subsequently reinstated by the State Government by issuing notification / resolution in this regard. In the Counter Affidavit filed on behalf of the State also there is an admission that Shashi Bhushan Roy was given extension for the third time. He continued on the post and thus entitled for arrears of salary. 9 On consideration of these facts and the law connected with it, I find that C.W.J.C. No. 2587 of 2008 and C.W.J.C. No. 1519 of 2010, filed by Mithilesh Kumar Singh, claiming arrears of salary and challenging the order passed by the Appellate Authority has got no merit. Both these Writ Applications are dismissed. C.W.J.C. No. 3035 of 2009 filed by Shashi Bhushan Roy, claiming arrears of salary for the period he was given extension and joined on 01.07.2005 till the date of completion of 11 months as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra on third occasion, is allowed. He is entitled for his arrears of salary. Since, this petitioner has been absorbed on the post of Panchayat Teacher, he is also entitled for salary for that post, arrears as well as current. Accordingly, this application is allowed. Proceeding book and register of Khalwa Gram Panchayat relating to appointment of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in the year 2005 had been called for perusal, it is being handed over to the Counsel appearing for the State for sending back to the concerned authority. SKM (Mridula Mishra, J.)