ANUSHA KUMARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard counsel for the parties and taking into account that the dispute in hand relates to appointment on the post of Panchayat Shikshak between the petitioner and the private respondent no. 9' only on the aspect that petitioner being the best among all the candidates on the basis of marks secured in the qualifying examination was edged out by the respondent no. 9 by use of two experience certificates produced by her (Respondent No. 9), this Court has examined the materials on record including the aforesaid two certificates of the Respondent No. 9. It is really shocking for this Court to note that the District Teachers Appellate Authority hereinafter referred to as the Authority instead of disapproving such award of 20 maks to respondent no. 9 for those two experience certificates has rejected the claim of the petitioner on a very flimsy ground, namely, that the two experience certificates produced by respondent no. 9 were not forged.

(2.) The plain and simple case of the petitioner was that she had secured 66.2% marks in the qualifying Intermediate Examination as against 50%, marked obtained by respondent no. 9 but respondent no. 9 having been given 20 weightage point for two experience certificates was allowed to become the first candidate over the petitioner. The gist of the allegation of the petitioner, therefore in her complaint was that the two experience certificates of the Respondent No. 9 were not worth consideration and in this regard what was said by her describing the two experience certificates to be forged was to be understood by the Authority in the context of contents of those two certificates. The two certificates are on record by way of Annexures-5 and 6. In one of those two certificates (Annexure-5) it is said that the petitioner, whose date of birth is admittedly 25.2.1985 and who had passed the qualifying examination of Madhyama and Intermediate Examination in the year 2002, was in fact already working as a selected Shiksha Premi between 14.8.1996 to 31.3.1998 in Prathmik Vidyalaya, Kurtha. That would literally mean that respondent no. 9 at the age of 11 years was working in a school as a Shiksha Premi while imparting education to the students of the school which in fact is not only impossible but also absurd, inasmuch as a girl of 11 years could have never been engaged by any authority in the Bihar Education Project. If such certificate was considered for appointing respondent no. 9 by giving weightage point, the same was definitely in conflict with the provisions of Bihar Panchayat Teacher Appointment Rules, 2006 wherein 20 weightage point was to be given for teaching experience of one or more years of service. Rule 9(v) being relevant in this regard is quoted hereinbeiow: (underlining for emphasis)

(3.) As would be apparent it was the teaching experience of a person which had to be given additional weightage. The question therefore would be whether a girl of 11 years could have been ever engaged as a teacher even in Bihar Education Project or could have participated in teaching work in any Primary School. An obvious answer will always be in negative inasmuch as a person who had not been even became major and had not passed either Madhyama (Matriculation) or Intermediate examination at the time of being working allegedly as a teacher (Shiksha Premi) in a Primary School could have never been merit points for teaching work.