IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.324 of 2011 IN CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 5786 of 2010 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No. 1400 of 2011 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No. 1401 of 2011 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.324 of 2011 ==================================================== 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner and Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Commissioner and Secretary, Human Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj. …. …. Appellant/Respondents Versus 1. Sanjay Kumar Son of Sri Godi Sah resident of Village+P.O. - Rajke Bangala, P.S - Thawe, District - Gopalganj. 2. Shambhu Prasad, son of Sri Dwarika Prasad, resident of Village- Semarauna, P.O. - Radhaganj, P.S.- Phulwaria, District - Gopalganj. 3. Ram Ayodhya Sah, Son of Late Gopi Chand Sah resident of Village- P.O.- Hakam , P.S. - Mohammadpur, District - Gopalganj. 4. Awadh Kishore Sah Son of Sri Munshi Singh, resident of Village- Bharkuia, P.O.-Barauli, P.S.-Barauli, District - Gopalganj. 5. Deelip Kumar, Son of Sri Yadav Lal, resident of Village-Jamo Mathia, P.O.- Madhopur, P.S.-Jama, District -Siwan. 6. Sri Niwas Sah Son of Sri Gopal Sah, resident of Village+ P.O.- Sirishia , P.S. - Nautan, District - Siwan. …. …. Respondents/Petitioners ==================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar No.-1, S.C.-12 ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2. 22.2.2011. This Appeal preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is filed by the State of Bihar and others - 2 - 183 beyond the period of limitation. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 2nd July 2010 passed by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 5786 of 2010. Pursuant to the selection process carried on by the Bihar Public Service Commission in the year 1998, the respondents-writ petitioners were selected for appointment as teachers under the State Government. Their names were recommended by the Bihar Public Service Commission for appointment. However, the concerned District Superintendent of Education had some doubt about the writ petitioners being scheduled tribes candidates. At the end of the enquiry the writ petitioners were found to be scheduled tribes candidates. However, the enquiry was not completed until the year 2008. In the meantime, the State Government framed the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 2006”) effective from 1st July 2006. In view of the provisions contained in the Rules of 2006, the State Government directed that the writ petitioners be appointed as Panchayat Teachers carrying consolidated pay. Feeling aggrieved the writ petitioners approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in above C.W.J.C. No. 5786 of 2010. The learned single Judge has held the action of the concerned District Superintendent of Education calling upon the writ petitioners to join as Panchayat Teachers under the Rules of 2006 as arbitrary. According to the learned - 3 - single Judge, as the writ petitioners were selected as teachers under the service of the State Government carrying permanent status and the pay-scales, they were entitled to such appointment. Consequently, the learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition and issued direction that the writ petitioners be appointed as regular teachers under the State Government. Feeling aggrieved the State Government has preferred the present Appeal. Learned Advocate Mr. Sanjay Kumar No.1 has appeared for the State Government. He has strenuously urged that in view of the Rules of 2006 now the writ petitioners cannot be appointed as teachers in the State Government; the only appointment that can be issued to the writ petitioners is that of Panchayat Teachers under the Rules of 2006. We see no substance in this appeal. The learned single Judge has rightly held that the rights of the writ petitioners had crystallized in the year 1998 and they were wrongly denied appointment at the relevant time. No case for interference is made out. The Appeal and the Applications stand disposed of. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Jyoti Saran, J)