IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11651 of 2009 1. VIRCHANDRA PRASAD, Son of Late Isri Lal Sah, resident of village Ismailpur, P.O. Sondho, P.S. Goraul, District – Vaishali. 2. SUBHASH KUAR, Son of Jalandhar Prasad Gupta, resident of village Ismailpur, P.S. Sondho, P.S. Goraul, District – Vaishali. 3. MANOJ KUMAR, Son of Ram Ayodhya Sah, resident of village – Simra, P.O. Mansoorpur, P.S. Vaishali, District – Vaishali. … Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director, Department of Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Patna. 5. The District Education Officer, Samastipur. 6. The District Education Officer, Sitamadhi. ….. Respondents. ----------- 02/ 06.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel appearing for the State. Petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondents to consider their certificates of Baby Teachers Certificate course granted by Gandhi Hindi Vidyapeeth, Prayag (Allahabad), U.P. for the purposes of appointment on the post of Primary Panchayat Teacher and Block Teacher in second phase of recruitment going to be held under Bihar Primary Panchayet Teachers Appointment and Service Conditions Rules, 2008. Similar issue has been decided by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 469 of 2009 and analogous cases (Anil Kumar & Ors Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.). The respondents have been directed to classify the - 2 - Institution as a fake Institution after obtaining information and supplying such information to the petitioners, thereafter to give opportunity to the petitioners to furnish their reply including information availed by them under Right to Information Act, only thereafter the respondents shall be required to pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing with their own stand of the Institution being fake, taking into consideration the defence of the petitioners and after proper consideration of both, pass reasoned and speaking order. This application is being disposed of, with a direction to the Respondent authority for conducting enquiry in the similar manner and pass reasoned order, as directed in C.W.J.C. No. 469 of 2009 and analogous cases. Respondents only then can decline the petitioner’s from participating in counselling from being appointed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)