Priti Kumari v. The Bihar School Examination Board
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16749 of 2023 ====================================================== Priti Kumari D/o Sunil Thakur, Resident of Village- Fattepur, P.S. - Pandaul, Belahi, District - Madhubani, at present C/o Surendra Prasad Sinha, Resident of Village - Shahbazpur, P.O. - Bhikhanpura, P.S. - Ahiarpur, District - Muzaffarpur, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The Bihar School Examination Board Patna through its Chairman. 2.
The Chairman Bihar School Examination Board, Patna, Bihar. 3.
The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. 4.
The Assistant Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. 5.
The Vigilance Officer, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. 6.
The Administrative Officer, Vigilance Verification Cell, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Lalit Kishore For the Vigilance :
Mr. Anil Singh For the BSEB :
Mr. Ankit Katriar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 28-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsels for the respondents.
2. By filing the present writ applications, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
(i) For quashing of letter dated 18.11.2022 contained in letter no.
BSEB/VVC/346/2022 issued and sent by the Administrative Officer, Vigilance Verification Cell, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
(ii) For holding that the earlier verification report issued by the respondent Board about the result of Bihar Eligibility Test, 2011 of petitioner is the
2/5 correct report.
(iii) For further direction to the respondents for issuing the result of the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) examination 2011 in which the petitioner has appeared in Paper-1 and Paper-2 and qualified in Paper-1 only.
(iv) For any relief(s) for which the petitioner is found entitled under the facts and circumstances of the present case.
3. The fact of the case, in brief, is that the petitioner has appeared in Bihar Eligibility Test, 2011 in both Paper -I (Class1 to 5) and Paper-II (Class 6 to 8) at Hajipur, Vaishali as per schedule and qualified Paper-I only and on that basis, result was issued by the respondent Secretary of Bihar School Examination Board and, after declaration of result, she was employed as Panchayat Teacher at Primary School, Punervara, North Tola, Sitamarhi. Thereafter, for verification, the respondent District Education Officer wrote a letter to the Secretary of the Board and, on the basis of verification report, the petitioner was found qualified in Paper-I, but the respondent examining body, later on, held that the petitioner has not passed in the examination and on the basis of the report of the board i.e. Administrative Officer, Vigilance Verification Cell, the local Panchayat Employment Unit terminated the petitioner from the service as Panchayat Teacher.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
3/5 salary of the petitioner was withheld due to the said confusion, therefore, having no alternative, she filed CWJC No. 6253 of 2019 and CWJC No. 6289 of 2019 for correction of result and payment of salary, respectively. Both the petitions were amalgmated and jointly heard and disposed of. It appears from the order dated 16.02.2023 passed in both the cases as common order that the issue of correction of TET result of petitioner was not taken up and decided, and it remained untouched and only the issue of payment of arrears of salary was considered.
5. Learned counsel further submits that in course of hearing of the aforesaid two writ applications filed by the petitioner, the District Education Officer, Sitamarhi again sent a letter dated 27.01.2023 contained in letter no.308 to the Board for verification of TET result and, after verification, the report was sent and from the said report, it appears that the petitioner did not appear in Paper-I (Class-1 to 5) and she got disqualified in Paper II.
6. It is further submitted that earlier, the Vigilance Bureau has inquired and verified the result of the petitioner on the basis of records and C.D. and found it correct, but later on, without any reliable reason, the concerned Authority subsequently started to change his own report and stand and her father name
4/5 was also found changed, which is very peculiar and surprising.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the Bihar School Examination Board submits that as per the records i.e. DTR and OTR, the details of the petitioner's BTET 2011 result is as follows:
Roll No.
3766118018 Candidate's Name Priti Kumari Father's Name Surendra Prasad Sinha Category General Sex Female DOB 05.08.1987 Paper-1 Marks: Blank Paper-2 Marks: 13 Percentage Marks 08.66% Result Not qualified
8. Learned counsel further submits that in view of the above, the application has no merit and the same is fit to be dismissed.
9. Learned counsel for the Vigilance Investigating Bureau supporting the learned counsel for the Board submits that the self attested BETET, 2011 result card submitted by the petitioner was verified from the Bihar School Examination Board, Patna and, after verification, the same was found forged and fake and since both the reports contained in letter dated 18.11.2022 (Annexure-A) and letter dated 20.09.2024, reveal that the cognizable offence has been committed by the petitioner, therefore, the Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna
5/5 has lodged FIR in Mahindwara P.S. (Sitamarhi) Case No. 140 of 2014 dated 26.09.2024 registered under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) against the petitioner.
10. Having gone through the matter in detail and considering the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, in my opinion, the aforesaid matter does not come under the perimeter of jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India and accordingly, it is fit to be dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U