CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.1747 OF 1990 -------- In the matter of applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. RAM PRASAD DUBEY, son of Shri Gopalji Dubey, Headmaster of Raghunath Jagernath High School, Bishambharpur, P.S.-Dariyapur, District-Saran ------------------ Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Director (Secondary Education)-cum-Additional Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna -----------------Respondents With CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 2829 OF 1991 MALTI VERMA -----------------petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Budha Marg, Patna 3. The District Education Officer, Patna 4. Smt. Radha Sinha, Headmistress of Project, Girls High School, Nagawa, P.S.- Naubatpur, District-Patna -------------Respondents ----------- For the petitioners: Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Onkar Kumar, Advocate Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anil Kumar Verma, Advocate Mr. V.M.K. Sinha, S.C. 3 ………… P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN --------------- Shiva Kirti Singh & Jyoti Saran, J.J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner in both these writ petitions and learned counsel for the State. 2 The common issue in both these writ petitions relates to qualification and experience required for recognition/appointment on the post of Headmaster in the High schools in question which were earlier managed by the managing committee and were taken over by the State with effect from 2.10.1980 under the provisions of Bihar Non-Government Secondary Schools (Taking over of Management and Control) Act, 1981. In the alternative prayers have been made for appointment of Headmasters in the concerned schools by treating the schools as unit. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh has submitted that even if the writ petitioners or the concerned respondents have superannuated from service by efflux of time, their claim may require consideration in the light of later Division Bench judgments and Supreme Court judgment so as to grant them benefits for the purpose of pension etc. He referred to judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of A.K. Pradhan Versus State of Bihar and Anr., 1998 (2) P.L.J.R. (SC) 2, in support of his submission that the experience of 7 years as Headmaster of the school before its take over as required under Circular No. 511 annexed with the counter affidavit should be counted from the date of grant of permission for establishment of the school till the requisite experience is gained by the founder Headmaster and after that date the founder Headmaster should be recognized as Headmaster of the school. 3 On the other hand, on behalf of the State reliance has been placed on Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Dhruv Lochan Pradhan Versus State of Bihar, 2001(2) P.L.J.R. 345 to submit that Circular Nos. 510 and 511 dated 20.11.1981 were considered in that judgment along with aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of A.K. Pradhan and other relevant judgments of this Court and Supreme Court and thereafter this Court held that relevant provisions were not considered and discussed in the case of A.K. Pradhan in so far as they relate to the matter of filling up the vacancies of Headmaster prior to 2.10.1980 in nationalized schools and it was also held that the prescribed period of 7 years applicable in these cases must be acquired by the claimant on the date of take over i.e. 2.10.1980. On going through the judgments cited by the parties, we find that the earlier Division Bench of this Court has considered the relevant Circulars, Rules as well as judgments and we find no hesitation in following the said judgment for the purpose of deciding the similar issue involved in these two cases also. We find substance in the submission advanced on behalf of the State and on facts there is no difficulty in noticing that till 2.10.1980 the petitioner in each of the cases had not completed 7 years on the post of Headmaster. In that view of the matter, they did not have the requisite qualification for being recognized/appointed as 4 Headmaster in the schools in question. Accordingly, we find no merit in the petitions. They are dismissed without cost. Patna High Court Dated the 25th January, 2010 A.F.R./S.Sb/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Jyoti Saran, J.)