LAWS(PAT)-2010-11-127

JANARDAN PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On November 19, 2010
JANARDAN PRASAD SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application petitioner has challenged an order of punishment passed by the Director, Secondary Education in terms of Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules contained in memo no. 1402(Ka) dated 6.5.2009, annexed as Annexure-1 with the writ application, by which, on conclusion of the enquiry, 5% pension of the petitioner, as well as of some others, has been withheld. Short facts of the case are that at the relevant time petitioner was an Assistant Teacher in High School, Shikandara, Jamui. For the secondary examination, to be held by the Board, petitioner was made Head Examiner of the Geography subject. Under him 18 co-examiners were appointed. Examination was held in March, 2005. After examination the answer-sheets were distributed among the co-examiners, details of which are in Annexure-1/A. The answer-sheets were evaluated and submitted to the Head Examiner of different subjects, including the petitioner in respect of Geography subject by the said 18 co-examiners. Marks foils were prepared and thereafter answer-sheets with marks foils were sent to the Board for preparation of result and publication of the same. Thereafter, petitioner superannuated from service with effect from 30.4.2005. Finally result was published by the Board in May, 2005.

(2.) After the result was published, it transpired in the Board that some manipulation had been done in all the answer sheets of all the subjects, including Geography, in respect of one student having Roll Code 5207 and Roll No. 310 whereby his marks were enhanced and he got the highest rank in the entire State. Upon this preliminary finding, Board issued a notice to the petitioner through letter dated 14.2.2006, as contained in Annexure-3. It was alleged in the notice that after examination some cutting and overwriting had been done in the answer-sheet of the said candidate in the subject of Geography which prima facie petitioner had done for the purposes of some illegal gain and to provide undue benefit to the candidate by which the candidate had topped in the examination in the State. Petitioner filed his reply to the notice vide his letter dated 19.2.2006, as contained in Annexure-4, addressed to the Secretary of the Board. In the reply petitioner took categorical stand that the answer-sheet of Roll No. 310 was in the bunch of answer-sheets which was allotted to a co-examiner, namely, Shyam Sunder Prasad Yadav. It was also stated in the reply that he had not evaluated the answer-sheet. It was further stated that in the sample checking of the answer-sheets of different co-examiners, he had evaluated the answer-sheets bearing Roll Nos. 281 to 285 from the bunch of answer-sheets allotted to said Sri Shyam Sunder Prasad Yadav. Thus, his categorical stand was that he had not done sample checking of this Roll No. 310 and, therefore, there cannot be any presumption with regard to his connivance or his having committed interpolation and overwriting in that answer-sheet.

(3.) Board was not satisfied with the said reply. Hence, the matter was referred to the Department. Department accordingly took a decision to initiate a proceeding against the petitioner and some others in terms of Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, as all of them had already superannuated. Charges were accordingly framed and were served on the petitioner under the signature of the Director, Secondary Education contained in memo no. 3153 dated 7.10.2006, annexed as Annexure-5. The single charge which was framed in the charge-sheet against the petitioner mentioned that in the answer-sheet of all subjects of the said candidate bearing Roll Code 5207 and Roll No. 310 there had been some manipulation by the co-examiners in which the petitioner was also involved as it was his duty to scrutinize the work of the co-examiners and to stop them from committing this mistake which showed that he was also involved in this matter. A Regional Deputy Director of Education was appointed as Inquiry Officer and District Education Officer was appointed as Conducting Officer.