USHA DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common judgment, we propose to dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 6914 and 9403 of 1999 since the question involved in both the writ petitions are identical. For the sake of convenience, we are taking the facts from Civil Writ Petition No. 6914 of 1999. Petitioner Smt. Usha Devi claimed quashing of the order by virtue of which she had been reverted from the post of Hindi Teacher to J.B.T. teacher. The facts alleged are that she was appointed as a J.B.T. teacher by the District Education Officer, Jind, in the Haryana Education Service (Non-Gazetted) Class-Ill, School Cadre. It was done on the recommendations of the Department Selection Committee. Directorate of Secondary Education, Haryana, Chandigarh. The Director of Secondary Education instructed all the District Education Officers of the State of Haryana to fill up 25% posts of Sanskrit/Hindi/Punjabi teachers by promoting the eligible J.B.T. teachers. The petitioner is M.A. in Hindi in llnd Division with B.Ed. from Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak. She was eligible to be appointed as a Hindi Teacher. Her case for promotion was sent by the Block Education Officer. Safidon to the District Primary Education Officer, Jind. The petitioner was promoted as Hindi teacher vide order dated 14.7.1998.

(2.) It is asserted that the District Education Officer, Jind, issued a notice dated 10.2.1999 by virtue of which the petitioner was declared ineligible for the promotion to the post of Hindi teacher. She was asked to submit her reply within 15 days. The petitioner filed a writ petition which was disposed of holding it to be premature. Subsequently, respondent No. 3 District Education Officer, Jind, passed an order. Annexure P-7 dated 4.5.1999 reverting the petitioner as J.B.T. teacher. The petitioner claims that the impugned order is illegal because she possessed the necessary qualifications and, in any case, the posts are to be filled up as per the instructions/rules that were prevalent at that time rather than State Education (Group C) Service Rules, 1998.

(3.) In the reply filed, petition as such had been contested. It has been pleaded that the petitioner was J.B.T. teacher. She was promoted as Hindi teacher vide order dated 14.7.1998. It was found that the petitioner has wrongly been promoted. A notice was served to her that she does not possess the required qualification for promotion as a Hindi teacher in accordance with the Haryana State School Education Cadre (Group C) Service Rules, 1998. The petitioner should have passed Bachelor of Arts with Hindi as elective subject whereas the petitioner has passed Bachelor of Arts with Hindi as compulsory subject. The reply of the petitioner had been considered and she was found to be not eligible.