Uma Kumari vs State of Bihar and Others

Narayan Roy, J.—Heard counsel for the parties. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that though she was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher by virtue of the order, as contained in annexure 3, issued under the signature of the School Inspectress-cum-Deputy Director of Education, Patna, she was terminated without any rhyme or reason.

When questioned, learned counsel for the petitioner could not explain as to the mode of the appointment of the petitioner, rather it is submitted that since her husband died while contesting Assembly Election, she was appointed on pure compassion.

It appears that the petitioner was appointed in a manner not recognised in law by respondent No. 4 in a most unauthorised way.

Since appointment of the petitioner was ab initio void, no other formalities were required to be followed while terminating her.

This application is, accordingly, dismissed. Before I part with this order, I am tempted to observe that swindling of public money is a serious question and in this view of the matter, the Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, respondent No. 2 is directed to examine the conduct of the then Inspectress of Schools, respondent No. 4, and fix the responsibility in accordance with law.