Patna High CourtCWJC/20512/2018allowed

Suchita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2019-01-15Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20512 of 2018 ====================================================== Suchita Kumari Wife of Kapil Dev Prasad Resident of Village- Baksoti, P.O. - Amarut, P.S.- Dobhi, District - Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Gaya.

3. The District Education Officer, Gaya.

4. The District Programme Officer Establishment, Gaya.

5. The Block Development Officer, Dobhi, Gaya.

6. The Block Education Officer, Dobhi, Gaya.

7. The Panchayat Secretary, Panchayat Teacher Niyojan Ikai, Gram Panchayat Raj, Dobhi, Block - Dobhi

8. The Principal, Primary School, Keshapi, Block - Dobhi, District - Gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shankar Kumar Choudhary For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Prabhakar Jha, GP-27 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 15-01-2019 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order of termination dated 12.08.2017 passed by the respondent no. 7, whereby and whereunder the services of the petitioner as Panchayat Teacher has been terminated on the ground of having produced forged certificate. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been terminated from her services without affording an opportunity of hearing since not even a show has been asked for from the petitioner before passing of the termination order. It is further submitted that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment of learned

Patna High Court CWJC No.20512 of 2018(2) dt.15-01-2019 2/2 Division Bench passed in L.P.A. No. 501 of 2017 on 14.11.2017.

The learned counsel for the respondents do not dispute the position as is existing in law.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated 12.08.2017 passed by the respondent no. 7 is quashed and the respondents are granted liberty to proceed in accordance with law. It is further directed that the petitioner should be reinstated and thereafter they should proceed in the matter in accordance with law, however, for the intervening period, no salary shall be paid to the petitioner but the same would be dependent upon the final outcome of the proceedings to be undertaken and concluded by the respondents.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U