LAWS(PAT)-2005-2-132

HARE RAM JHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On February 11, 2005
HARE RAM JHA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorary for quashing the order dated 1st of November, 1999 (Annexure-10) whereby the Headmaster of the School where the petitioner was working has been asked not to take work from the petitioner and stop payment of salary.

(2.) Facts necessary for the decision of the present writ application are that by order dated 13.1.1986 (Annexure-4), petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Matric untrained scale arid posted at Government Basic School, Shore Jairam, in the district of Samastipur. Lateron, by order dated 3rd of June, 1989 services of 26 teachers were terminated which included Nirmala Sinha, Suresh Chandra Jha, Ramprit Thakur, Ramesh Kumar Mishra, Md. Ashfaque, Renu Kumari, Mahboob Alam, Amir Chandra Manjhu, Abdul Karim, Dinesh Chandra Pandey, Ujagar Mahto, Quamruzzaman and Amrendra Bahadur as also the petitioner. In view of the interim order passed by this Court in the writ application filed by some of the teachers, whose services were terminated along with the petitioner, petitioner also continued in service, notwithstanding the order of termination. Writ application filed by such teachers, i.e. CWJC No. 6543 of 1989 (Ramesh Kumar Mishra v. The State of Bihar and Ors., and CWJC No. 6577 of 1989 Amirchand Manjhi and Ors. v. The State of Bihar and Ors., were disposed of by common order dated 7th of August, 1997 (Annexure-10), inter alia, observing as follows :

(3.) It seems that similar orders have been passed in the writ petitions filed by other Assistant Teachers whose services were terminated. It has been admitted by the respondents that in view of such orders passed by this Court, several Assistant Teachers are still in service. Petitioner in the meanwhile had undergone teachers training. Later on, it came to the notice of the respondents that petitioner was not party in the writ application filed before this Court, by the impugned order petitioner has been prohibited from working and his salary was also been stopped.