The State of Bihar and Others vs Anjani Kumar

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the State and its officials and perused the order of the writ court under appeal. The writ court has allowed the writ petition with consequential benefit after quashing the impugned order dated 10.10.2009. By the impugned order the Superintendent of Education, Nawadah cancelled the initial appointment of the writ petitioner/respondent herein as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra and as a result his absorption on the post of Panchayat Teacher was also cancelled. This was done on the ground that after appointment or engagement as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra in the year 2003 when he was matriculate he could not have persued course for acquiring Intermediate degree even in evening or morning classes without taking leave or permission of the authority. The stand of the writ petitioner was that he pursued the course for Intermediate after seeking permission from Mukhia and Panchayat Secretary of the Gram Panchayat.

There is no dispute that the writ petitioner completed studies for Intermediate in 2003-05 sessions and on that basis took the examination and has acquired required degree of Intermediate on the basis whereof he was absorbed on the post of Panchayat Teacher with effect from 01.07.2006. On that post he has worked for more than three years before his very initial engagement has been cancelled for the reasons noticed above.

The writ court looked into the permission accorded by the Mukhia and Panchayat Secretary for appearance in the examination and held that there was no illegality in the action of the petitioner in enhancing his qualification during such period. We have also not been shown any rules or policy decision governing Panchayat Shiksha Mitra which may create any restriction upon acquiring such degree while in service as a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. The writ court has also held that after the writ petitioner was absorbed on the post of Panchayat Teacher his service could not have been terminated by the District Superintendent of Education because he has no such competence under the relevant rules. The impugned order was also found to be in violation of principle of natural justice. Considering the basic issue and finding that there was no legal restriction in the way of the writ petitioner in acquiring higher educational qualification while engagement on honorarium as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, we find no merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed.