RAJ NARAYAN RAY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The most significant aspect of the case is best noticed in a paragraph of the order of the learned Judge, which this Court reproduces :

(2.) It is not understood why the petitioners filed the writ petition as they had rested and bided their peace. Perhaps, they would have been above to get away with a regularjsed appointment. But, temptation to add two and half year so far as one petitioner is concerned and six months in so far as the other is concerned, let them into a trap which the serenity of law did not let them get away with. Bad situations and bad practices do not make good law.

(3.) The facts in the case are glaring but simple. Petitioner No. 1 (Raj Narayan Ray) was appointed on 26th December, 1969. In pursuance of this appointment he joined the school on 2 January, 1970. His date of birth is 15 December, 1954. Thus, he was about 15 years of age when he was appointed as a teacher. Not only this, he joined the school for one day on 2 January, 1970. Thereafter, he proceeded on study leave. The first question is, is a sabbatical permitted to a primary school teacher? This petitioner did his intermediate science in 1972 and B.Sc. in 1974 and he was supposed to join the school in 1974. Clearly, he was absent from the school for four years. Such a long leave of absence warrants dismissal not an appointment. The contention is that he had taken leave. The another question is how he was appointed in 15 years. The next petitioner (Ram Chandra Prasad) was appointed on 15 December, 1970. He joined the school on 1 January, 1971. This petitioner was born on 18 May, 1953. On the date of appointment he was 17 years and some months.