SHAMBHU NATH MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for quashing he order dated 14.12.2001 passed by the Special Director, Secondary Education in appeal No. 19 of 1997, whereby respondent No. 9 has been declared senior to the petitioner.

(2.) SHORT facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner as also respondent No. 9 were appointed as teachers on 1.4.1981 and 1.1.1979 respectively. At the time of appointment, petitioner possessed degree and Madhyama qualifications whereas respondent No. 9 had degree with Honours. It appears that second post of teacher had fallen vacant some time in the year 1986-87 and step was taken to fill up the said post. The Managing Committee of the School vide its resolution, dated 22nd of June, 1987, decided to appoint the petitioner as second teacher and forwarded the decision to the Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board. The Board approved the appointment of the petitioner by order dated 8th of August, 1988. Respondent No. 9 challenged the aforesaid order in CWJC No. 5830 of 1989 but during the pendency of the said case, the authorities considered the case of respondent No. 9 and by order dated 7th of October, 1991 allowed him to function on the second post in the scale of Rs. 730-1080/- cancelling the earlier order date 8th of August, 1988 referred to above. The aforesaid order was challenged before the Special Director by the petitioner who by order dated 7th of October, 1991, reversed the same. Respondent No. 9 challenged the same by filing CWJC No. 553 of 1999, Nagendra Prasad v. Sanskrit Shiksha Board and Ors., before this Court. A learned Single Judge of this Court, by order dated 9.5.2000 (Annexure-9) set aside the order dated 6th of November, 1998 whereby the Special Director had set aside the order in favour of respondent No. 9 dated 7th of October, 1991 and remitted the matter back to the Special Director in the following words :-- "For the reasons aforesaid, I set aside the order dated 7th of November, 1988 passed in appeal No. 19 of 1997 and remit the matter to the Special Director to determine the question as to whether both the petitioner and the 6th respondent were eligible for appointment to the post of 2nd teacher as on 8th August, 1988, when the initial order of approval was issued by the Board. If both are found to be eligible, the senior should be preferred over the junior."

(3.) IN the result, I do not find any merit in this application and it is dismissed in limine, without any order as to cost. Application dismissed.