IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6515 of 2009 MUKUND KUMAR, SON OF SHRI RAM KRIPAL THAKUR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-JANIPUR, TOLA-KHOPI, P.S.- NANPUR, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI ……..PETITIONER -With- CWJC No.6685 of 2009 KAUSHAL KISHORE THAKUR, S/O SHRI GANGADHAR THAKUR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BAURHA, P.S.-KHURHAR, DISTRICT-MADHUBAN I…… PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through its Secretary , the Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 2. The District Magistrate, At+P.S.+District-Sitamarhi 3. The District Magistrate, At+P.S.+District-Madhubani 4. The District Education Officer, At+P.S.+District-Sitamarhi 5. The District Education Officer, At+P.S.+District-Madhubani ………… …………….. Respondents (in both cases) ----------- 2. 23.06.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the state. Prayer of the petitioners is for a direction to the respondents to consider his case for appointment on the post of Panchayat/Nagar Panchayat/Block Panchayat Teachers in the district of Sitamarhi and Madhubani concerning different Panchayats. Petitioners have qualification of Baby Teachers Certificate (B.T.C.) from Gandhi Hindi Vidyapeeth, Prayag (Allahabad), Uttar Pradesh. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that B.T.C. Training course was completed by the petitioners from Gandhi Hindi Vidyapeeth, Prayag, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh prior to 17.8.1995 i.e. before the commencement of National Council for Teachers Education Act. It is also submitted that the degree 2 was recognized by the Government of India, as such, petitioners are entitled for appointment on the post of Panchayat/Nagar Panchayat/Block Panchayat Teachers. Annexure-4 is the order passed by this court in similar matter i.e. C.W.J.C. No. 469 of 2009 and another analogous cases. In those cases also, petitioners had qualification of B.T.C. from same institute and their grievance was also that they have wrongly been denied from being considered for appointment on the post of teachers. The writ application was disposed of with a direction for consideration of the case of the petitioners in terms of respondent’s letter dated 22.01.2009. The respondents were directed to take decision after furnishing the information to the petitioners and to pass a reasoned and speaking order after proper consideration of the petitioners case. These writ applications are also being disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 469 of 2009 and analogous cases. Petitioners’ case be considered by the respondents in terms of letter dated 22.01.2009. The respondents will make available all materials to the petitioners. Petitioners should be given liberty to furnish their reply including the information available to them under Right to Information Act. The respondents, thereafter, will pass a reasoned order. Petitioners’ case should be considered by the same authority which has considered the case of the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 469 of 2009 and its analogous cases. The orders must be 3 passed within six weeks from the date of communication/production of the order. With the aforesaid observation, both writ applications are being disposed of. akv/ ( Mridula Mishra, J )