IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12076 of 2009 RABINDRA MISHRA, Son of Late Madan Mishra, resident of village- Ahirolia, Via-Ramgarhwa, P.S.-Ramgarhwa, District-East Champaran. ..............Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through its Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 2. Director, Secondary Education, Intermediate Council Bhawan, Budh Marg, Patna-1. 3. Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 4. District Education Officer, West Champaran at Bettiah. .....................Respondents. ----------- 2/ 23.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner’s prayer is for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 202, Patna dated 27.05.2008 issued by the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar whereby petitioner has been informed that his appointment is irregular, as such, he is terminated from his service and he cannot be regularized on his post. Petitioner’s case is that the school in which he was appointed, was taken over under the project scheme contained in Letter No. 705 dated 12.10.1982. He was appointed by the D.E.O., on the recommendation of the committee headed by R.D.D.E. Subsequently, he was allowed the pay scale and continued on the post till 2002. Earlier, several writ applications relating to appointment in Project Schools were filed, challenging termination orders. The petitioner had also preferred C.W.J.C. No. 12103 of 2004, which was heard analogous and the order of 2 termination was quashed vide order dated 19.02.2004. The State Government preferred LPA No. 1192 of 2005 assailing the validity of order passed by writ court. The L.P.A. was also heard analogous with several other L.P.As. and, finally, the matters were disposed of giving direction to the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar to constitute a committee for examining the validity of the appointment of the teachers in the Project Schools, in the light of Apex Court’s decision in State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi. A number of L.P.A. had been preferred by the State against orders passed in several writ applications, and some of the cases in the list of analogous cases related to the schools, taken over under the Scheme of Project School in the year 1981-82, appointment of teachers in such schools were on a different footing than appointments in schools taken over under Project School Scheme in the year 1984-85, 87-89. The State Government, subsequently, itself came out with a clarification, stating that schools which were taken over by the State Government under the scheme in the year 1981-82, appointments made in such schools have been finalized and validity of appointment in such schools, need no further enquiry. Petitioners were appointed in the projects schools taken over by the State Government in the year 1981-82. Petitioner’s case is that despite state’s own stand not to question validity of such appointments, the case of the petitioner was arbitrarily reopened 3 and considered by three men committee. Finally, the committee recorded a finding that illegally without observing the process, rules of appointment, petitioner was appointed in the school. School, where petitioner is still working was taken over under the project scheme in the year 1981-82 vide the scheme under the provisions of Letter No. 705 dated 12.10.1982, as such his case was not at all required to be re-considered for examining the validity or legality of his appointment. Supplementary affidavit has been filed by the petitioner. In para 3 of the supplementary affidavit the petitioner has given reference of such persons who were also appointed in the same school along with the petitioner and their appointment has been held to be legal and finally settled. In this view of the matter, similar treatment was required to be given to the petitioner, holding that his case is not to be examined as his appointment in the present school was under 1981-82 scheme of the Government. Considering the fact and also that in the similar situation, this Court has decided several similar matters, regarding which the petitioner has annexed the orders as annexure-9 along with supplementary affidavit. Petitioner’s case is fully covered by the decision reported in annexure-9 vide C.W.J.C. No. 13310 of 2008 and analogous cases. The impugned order passed by the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, contained in Memo No. 202 Patna, dated 4 27.05.2008 is arbitrary and completely without jurisdiction. Considering the stand taken over by the government in the year 1981-82 relating to the matters of such project schools, the impugned order is quashed. Petitioner’s appointment in the project school is held to be legal and he is entitled for all such benefits which have been allowed to the similarly situated persons. This application is allowed. Sanjeet/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)