Brijesh Kumar Shukla vs Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Sant Ravidas Nagar and Others

Hon''ble Krishna Murari, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Vipul Tripathi holding brief of Shri Neeraj Tripathi for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Notice on behalf of respondent no. 3 has been accepted by Shri Anil Tiwari.

By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 30.03.2002 passed by Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Sant Ravidas Nagar, Annexure 1 to the writ petition, by which the appointment order of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher was set aside on the ground that he had not passed the Shiksha Shastri examination and, therefore, is not entitled to be appointed as Assistant Teacher.

Petitioner has clearly stated in paragraph 3 of the writ petition that he passed the Shiksha Shastri examination (equivalent to B. Ed. degree) from Sampurnanand Sanskrit University, Varansi in the year 1994 in 1st division. It has further been pleaded that he was admitted in Special B.T.C. Training Course, 1994 which was successfully completed by him and vide order dated 20.12.1999, he was appointed as Assistant Teacher by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Sant Ravidas Nagar.

It appears that some verification was sought with respect to the Shiksha Shastri degree of the petitioner and certain other similarly situated candidates from the Sampurnanand Sanskrit University and on the basis of some report submitted by the University, the appointment of the petitioner as well as other similarly situated candidates was cancelled vide order dated 30th March, 2002.

It has categorically been pleaded by the petitioner that the impugned order was passed without any notice or opportunity of hearing. Further a perusal of the aforesaid order goes to show that the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled on account of the report that on verification, the Shiksha Shastri result was not found to be correct.

Various writ petitions were filed by similarly situated persons. In Writ Petition No. 26156 of 2002, Ashok Kumar Yadav & Anr. v. District Basic Education Officer & Ors., preferred by identically situated persons whose appointments were also cancelled by the same order, on the strength of the same report submitted by the University, this Court summoned the record of Sampurnanand Sanskrit University, Varansi and after examining the same, allowed the writ petition finding that the petitioners therein have cleared the examination and had passed in the relevant years. The judgment of the learned Single Judge was challenged in Special Appeal No. 1293 of 2007 which was dismissed vide order dated 19.07.2010. The Division Bench has taken note of yet another Writ Petition No. 28809 of 2002 which was filed by identically situated persons cancelling their appointment on the basis of same verification report which was also allowed vide order dated 22.04.2003 against which Special Appeal No. 529 of 2003 was preferred, which was also dismissed. The Division Bench has clearly recorded a finding that the mistake was, in fact, on the part of the University in issuing wrong mark sheets showing wrong roll numbers to the respondents, which have later been corrected and for the mistake of the authorities, the candidates cannot be made to suffer.

The case of the present petitioner is also squarely covered by the facts of Writ Petition No. 26156 of 2002 as well as of Writ Petition No. 28809 of 2002 which were allowed by the learned Single Judges and the judgments have been affirmed in special appeals, and thus, the petitioner is also entitled to the same treatment and benefit.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the impugned order dated 30.03.2002, in so far as it relates to the petitioner, is quashed and is set aside. The petitioner will be entitled to reinstatement in service with full consequential benefits.

Writ petition, accordingly, stands allowed to the extent directed above.

However, in the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.