IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1555 of 2011 ====================================================== Md.Abu Nasar Alam @ Md.Abu Nasar, S/o Kd. Sikandar, R/o Vilalge- Rawnia, P.O.-Perbheli, P.S.-Kadwa, District-Katihar. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 6. District Magistrate, Purnea, District-Purnea. 7. Block Development Officer, Baisi, District-Purnea. 8. District Education Officer, Purnea. 9. The District Superintendent of Education, District- Purnea. 10. Block Education Extension Officer, District-Purnea. 11. Member District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Purnea. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Wasi Ahmad Khan, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Lalit Kishore, AAG 1. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 15 22-09-2011 This petition under article 226 of the Constitution is filed by one Md. Abu Nasar Alam @ Md. Abu Nasar to question the legality of Rules 6 and 8 of the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teacher (Employment & Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 as being arbitrary and discriminatory insofar as the Maulvis are not Patna High Court CWJC No.1555 of 2011 (15) dt.22-09-2011 2 / 3 2 considered eligible for appointment as primary teachers except for teaching the Urdu language. Learned counsel Mr. Wasi Ahmad Khan has appeared for the petitioner. He has submitted that like any other eligible candidate, a person possessing the qualification of Maulvi is also qualified to teach students in the primary schools. Nevertheless, they are not considered eligible. Their entry is restricted for appointment as Urdu teacher alone. Thus, unreasonable and unsustainable classification has been made amongst the equals i.e. persons eligible for appointment as primary school teachers. Petition is contested by the learned Additional Advocate General-1, Mr. Lalit Kishore. He has submitted that it is a matter of legislative policy to decide the eligibility for appointment in public service. The classification is based on a rationale on the basis of education received by the candidates possessing intermediate and the candidates having qualification of Maulvi or Up-Shastri. He has also submitted that the matter has been considered by this court in the matter of Parvez Alam & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. [2009(2) PLJR 213]. The State of Bihar has, in exercise of powers conferred by Article 243 of the Constitution read with Sections 47, 48 and 146 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 framed the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2006’). The said Rules govern, inter alia, appointment of the primary school teachers. Rule 6 of the Rules of 2006 provides that the persons qualified in Urdu or possessing qualification of Maulvi will be considered for appointment for the post reserved Patna High Court CWJC No.1555 of 2011 (15) dt.22-09-2011 3 / 3 3 for Urdu. Rule 8 of the Rules of 2006 provides for the eligibility of the teachers. In respect of Panchayat Teachers, it provides, inter alia, that a candidate must have passed higher secondary or intermediate or equivalent examination and be trained in two years’ training course recognized by the National Council for Teacher Education. The certificate of Maulvi and Up-Shastri are specifically excluded from the eligibility. Learned counsel Mr. Wasi Ahmad Khan has not been able to establish that the impugned Rules are arbitrary or have no rational or nexus to the object to be achieved by Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) (Amendment) Rules, 2008. The above referred Rule 8 of the Rules of 2006 has been amended to specifically exclude the degree in technical education (Polytechnic, Unani education) physical education, language specific degree of Maulvi and Up- Shastri. For the aforesaid reason and in view of the binding precedent in the matter of Parvez Alam (Supra), the petition is dismissed in limine. Sujit/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)