Usha Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5964 of 2013 ====================================================== Usha Kumari W/O Nagendra Prasad Singh R/O Village- Rahimapur, P.O.- Rahimapur, P.S.- Bidupur, Distt.- Vaishali .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar, Through The Commissioner Cum Secretary Department Of Education, Government Of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna

2. The Director Department Of Primary Education, Government Of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Vaishali

4. The District Education Officer, Vaishali

5. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Vaishali

6. Block Education Officer, Desari, Vaishali .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-02-2016 The petitioner seeks quashing of order contained in memo dated 28.2.2013, issued by the District Education Officer, Vaishali (respondent no.4) by which her appointment as an Assistant teacher has been cancelled on the ground that she submitted the certificate of a training institute, namely, Arya Primary Teacher Training College, Chhatwara, Mahua, Vaishali in Session 1980-82, which was not a recognized institute. The petitioner submits that she took admission in Arya Primary Teacher's Training College, Chhatwara, Mahua, Vaishali in Session 1980-82 and passed this examination in year 1984. However, recognition to this institute was withdrawn only in the year 1993, as such, the session in which she took training

Patna High Court CWJC No.5964 of 2013 (3) dt.08-02-2016 2/2 is not affected by Government's decision.

Counsel for the State submits that recognition of the institution wherefrom petitioner took training has been cancelled by the State Government vide letter dated 27.11.1990. The issue is whether the institution was granted recognition at the time of passing of the petitioner. However, this issue has been raised a bit late. In view of firm direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) No.26824 of 2012, which has been elaborately referred to in order dated 14.1.2016, passed in C.W.J.C.No. 6753 of 2003, it is difficult to sustain the impugned order. I find that the case of the petitioner broadly stands on similar footing.

The writ petition is allowed in terms of order dated 14.1.2016.The impugned order, dated 28.2.2013 is set aside. (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J) Shashi.

U