PHULENA PRASAD YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 3.2.2005 passed by the learned single Judge by which he has dismissed the writ application filed by the appellant to recognize him as headmaster of the school and upheld the order passed by the authority rejecting his claim.

(3.) THIS Court has considered the aforesaid observation made in A.K. Pradhans case (supra) in the case of Ram Balak Prasad Singh V/s. State of Bihar, reported in 1998(3) PLJR 255, relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab V/s. Samrendra Kumar, reported in AIR 1992 S.C. 1593 wherein the Apex Court has held that the decision of Apex Court is available as precedent only if it decides a question of law, and order of the Supreme Court granting certain relief in exercise of power under Article 142 does not empower the High Court to pass the similar order and this Court to the conclusion that the observations made by the Supreme Court in A.K. Pradhans case (supra) is not an authority to hold that though a person was not having requisite experience for being appointed as headmaster but subsequently be appointed as headmaster after completing requisite experience by regularization, for the reason that the procedure for appointment of headmaster after taking over of the school is different. There is a State cadre of Headmaster and appointment is made by following a procedure prescribed under the rules. If regularization is made by counting subsequent experience after taking over then it will not only disturb the cadre but will also affect the interest of many teachers.