IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14880 of 2007 1. RAJ KUMAR PASWAN, SON OF LAXMAN PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NIGARI, P.O. PHARHA, P.S. AKBARPUR, DISTRICT NAWADA 2. RAJAN KUMAR, SON OF RAM BRIKSH CHAUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAJAUNDHA, P.O. AND P.S. SIRDALA, DISTRICT NAWADA 3. DINESH CHAUDHARY, SON OF PRAYAG CHAUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PATHRA ENGLISH, P.O. ODHANPUR, P.S. MUFFASIL, DISTRICT NAWADA 4. MAHAVIR CHAUDHARY, SON OF KULDIP CHAUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DEORA, P.O. KONIWAR, P.S. NARHAT, DISTRICT NAWADA 5. MD. MOKHTAR, SON OF MD. MOZZAM ANSARI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BALIA BUZURG, P.O. RAJHAT, P.S. AKBARPUR, DISTRICT NAWADA 6. MAMTA KUMARI, DAUGHTER OF RAJ NANDAN PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARARA, P.S. NOORSARAI, DISTRICT NALANDA 7. GEETA KUMARI, DAUGHTER OF RAM KHELAWAN PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BAREPUR, P.S. SARE, DISTRICT NALANDA………………………………………. PETITIONERS Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, PATNA 2. DIRECTOR (SECONDARY EDUCATION), HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA 3. DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER-CUM-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NAWADA…………………………RESPONDENTS *** For the Petitioners: Mr. Ganesh Pd. Singh, Sr .Advocate with M/s. S.Parasmani & Pramod Kumar, Advocates For the State: Mr. Bibhakar Tiwary Asst.Counsel to G.P. No.19 *** 5. 28.07.2009 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. It is an admitted position that by Annexure-2 series petitioners were selected as teachers under the provisions of Bihar Zila Parishad Secondary & Higher Secondary Teachers - 2 - (Appointment & Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”). Pursuant to the said selection, they submitted their consent to the District Education Officer, Nawadah and submitted their joining in the respective schools. It appears that in response to some clarification sought for by the District Education Officer, Samstipur, the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna issued a letter vide Memo no.1532 dated 27.7.2007 clarifying that as per the provisions of the said Rules, the degree of Sahityalankar from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar was not equivalent to decree of graduation from any recognized University. It appears that the copy of this memo was sent to all the District Education Officers in the State for their information. Pursuant to that clarification issued by respondent no.2, Director (Secondary Education), Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Nawadah issued Memo No. 1921 dated 26.10.2007 terminating the services of the petitioners. The said memo issued by the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Nawada is annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ application and is under challenge. - 3 - Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners made elaborate arguments in support of his submission that an exception stands carved out in the judgment of the Division Bench reported in 2004 (1) PLJR 387 in the case of Ganesh Prasad Srivastav Versus Punjab National Bank, and the said degree is recognized as equivalent to graduation from any recognized University in cases of appointment of incumbents on the post of Hindi Teachers at least. He has submitted that the order of the Government annexed as Annexure-9 with the supplementary affidavit filed today contained in Memo No. 1346 dated 27.8.2008 also clarifies that the said degree of Sahitalankar from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar is not treated as equivalent to a B.A degree for the purpose of appointment of general teachers only. He submits that from reading of that letter, it can be inferred that the said embargo does not apply to incumbents applying for appointment as Language Teacher. However, he submits that in any case after their appointment and their joining in the respective schools, petitioners had acquired right to continue in service and, therefore, before passing any adverse order terminating their services, the authority had - 4 - to comply with the principles of natural justice. He submits that apparently, no notice was issued to the petitioners by the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer before termination of their services and, therefore, the impugned order is violative of the principles of natural justice. In the counter affidavit it has nowhere been claimed that any notice was issued to the petitioners before terminating their services. Therefore, without going into the merits of the claim of the petitioners, this writ application is fit to be disposed of on the technical ground of violation of principles of natural justice in issuing the impugned order of termination of services of the petitioners. In the result, this writ application is allowed. The impugned order, as contained in Annexure-4, is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to respondent no.3 Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Nawadah, who shall issue notice to the petitioners and give them opportunity to file their reply in support of validity of their appointment and, if necessary, will hear the petitioners in person and thereafter - 5 - pass appropriate orders in the matter strictly in accordance with law. It is made clear that till final decision is taken in the matter, the petitioners shall not be entitled to any pecuniary benefits which shall abide by the final decision taken in the matter with regard to the validity of their appointment. It is also made clear that in case the final decision goes in favour of the petitioners and their appointment is found to be valid, they shall be entitled to all the pecuniary benefits. Final decision in the matter, either way, shall be taken within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is made clear that no observation made in this order shall be construed as an opinion of this Court and the matter has to be decided strictly in accordance with law on its own merits. B.T (J.N. Singh, J.)