STATE OF BIHAR Vs. MAMTA KUMARI D/O YOGENDRA SINGH & W/O BIBHAV KUMAR PABHAKAR : BABITA KUMARI W/O SUDHIR KUMAR CHOUDHARY : KRISHNA KUMARI W/O SHRI RAM JEEWAN RAM : RAM JEEWAN RAM S/O YOGENDRA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants as also learned counsel for the contesting respondent writ petitioner in all these four appeals.

(2.) All these appeals though arise out of different orders passed by the learned Single Judge in the respect connected writ petition but involve identical question and therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.

(3.) At the outset, it needs to be recorded here that though the facts of all the four writ petitions C.W.J.a No. 10748 of 2008 giving rise to LP.A. No. 28 of 2010, CWJ.C. No. 11667 of 2009 giving rise to LP.A. No. 206 of 2010, C.W.J.C No. 6150 of 2009 giving rise to LP.A. No.314 of 2010 and C.W.J.C. No. 5878 of 2009 giving rise to LP.A. No. 353 of 2010 differ only in respect of some of the dates relating to acquiring qualification, appointment and termination of service of the Respondent writ petitioners but the common thing binding in all these cases are that all of them having obtained the degree of Madhyama (Visharad) from the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad in/between 2003-05 had filed application for the post of Panchayat Teacher in the year 2006 (barring respondent writ petitioner, namely, Babita Kumari who appointed as a Siksha Mitra on 26.7.2005 and absorbed as Panchayat Teacher with effect from 1.7.2006) by claiming to be possessing the qualification for the post of Panchayat Teacher and were subsequently removed from service on the ground that they did not possess the qualification for the post of Panchayat Teacher, inasmuch as, their degree of Shiksha Visharad from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad was neither recognized nor an equivalent qualification of Intermediate and as such, all of them were terminated from service on different dates in the year 2007.