SADANAND BAITHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three cases i.e. MJC No. 2281 of 2008, MJC No. 2282 of 2008 and MJC No. 2283 of 2008. are also arising out of the same order of this Court and as such taken together with the rest of cases where all parties are represented.

(2.) ON 20.5.2008 a large number of writ petitions being C.W.J.C. No. 10568 of 2007 and analogous matters were disposed of. Noticing the judgment of the Supreme Court inter -party and other factual issue all writ petitions were allowed and the order terminating the services of the teachers were set aside. It was held that they would be entitled to full continuity of service but their tenure would continue only upto the time when duly newly recruited persons are appointed. They were given liberty to apply as well. All these directions were pursuant to the directions of the Apex Court itself. The writ had been necessitated because notwithstanding clear direction of the Apex Court and virtually in defiance thereof petitioners were dismissed again. Thus, effectively the petitioners became entitled to not only reinstatement but with back wages as well. In May, 2008 the writ petitions were allowed. The number of writ petitioners were quite large and spread in three districts i.e. Gopalganj, Siwan and Chapra. All three under one Commissionary i.e. Saran. This problem apparently did not arise any where else in Bihar. The three districts are immediately under the control and supervision of the Regional Deputy Director of Education with respective District Education Officers of the three districts under him In these proceedings now it is revealed that the total amount of payment for arrears that were to be made was quite substantial. This was known to all and it is apparently that which starts the problem. For almost a year the District Education Officers, the Regional Deputy Director, Education, wait for something more than the judgment for its implementation. Court would not like to discuss what. Ultimately petitioners being fed up filed these contempt applications apart from some other contempt applications as well for securing to themselves what had already been given to them by this Court. They sought reinstatement, back wages and current wages. The contempt applications, some of which were filed in middle of the year 2008 could not be taken up. The long list before this Court left the cases pending. Regrettably the authorities also choose to go deep slumber. They wake up only in March, 2009, after almost a year when some of the contempt applications are taken up by another Hon 'ble Judge of this Court. The only defence taken by the State there is that they proposed to file a letters patent appeal. Still this Court does not give them time but only observes that payments of arrears of salary, current salary and joining would all be subject to the result of the proposed letters patent appeal. This is order dated 16.3.2009 in some of the contempt applications, one of them being MJC No. 2225 of 2008. Again nothing was done and even though over a year had elapsed even the L.P.A. had not been filed, still authorities sat over the matter. Then the Regional Deputy Director, Education, who controls the three districts which are only the three problem districts, on 19.3.2009 wrote seeking compliance of orders of the writ Court. He pointed out that request for allotment of fund should be sent immediately so that by 30th March, 2009, payments are made. It is on record that thereafter he kept sending reminders to the District Education Officers, who are his subordinates and seeking guidance from the Director, Primary Education, but did nothing more. In the meantime on or about 9th April, 2009 the L.P.As. were filed, they were summarily dismissed on 22.5.2009. This was known to all officers still files kept running from one person to another directing payment asking for payment but no one making payment with the exception of Gopalganj. The District Education Officers, Gopalganj has filed a show cause stating that having received the letter of the Regional Deputy Director, Education, Saran, dated 19.3.2009 he found that there was some surplus funds available with various Headmasters where the petitioners had joined. He immediately directed that payments from those surplus fund be made before it lapsed on the close of financial year. Thus, with exception of one school or few petitioners, the rest in the District of Gopalganj were paid their arrears. They had already joined. There is no dispute. This sort of, upset people immediately. The Regional Deputy Director, Education, on coming to know of this payment had been made, on 26.6.2009 issued a show cause notice to the District Education Officer, Gopalganj, which clearly points out that there had not been any direction issued by him to make payment as such why payments of arrears of salary were made. The said document is on record. The District Education Officer, Gopalganj, reverting states that he was only complying with directions of this Court and payments being long over due, from surplus fund before they lapsed, payments were made, they would be recouped in the next financial year. This was not appreciated by the Regional Deputy Director, Education who found his explanation to be grossly unsatisfactory, rejecting the show cause and holding that his order to make payments were wrongly interpreted and the explanation was unsatisfactory, payment should not have been made. It is a matter of record that in March, 2009, itself the Director, Primary Education had written to the Regional Deputy Director, Education as well as the District Education Officers to immediately ascertain the amounts and inform the Directorate so that necessary provisions can be made for fund allocation for payment in compliance with the order of this Court. To keep the records moving every month, the Regional Deputy Director, Education, would write one letter either upwards to the Director or downwards to the District Education Officers but did nothing beyond that. As noticed above even when efforts were made to make payment, he took serious objections to it. It may be noted here that when these contempt applications were taken up earlier, petitioners had complained first with regard to the attitude of the Regional Deputy Director, Education, Saran, in the matter. This Court ordered the Regional Deputy Director, Education, Saran, to appear in person and file a show cause. He appeared in person and filed a show cause. His stand basically was that I am merely a middle man between the District Education Officers and the Director, Primary Education. I have already informed the Director, Primary Education long back but what can I do if the Directorate does not release fund and as such 1 have done every thing. The fault lies with the Director and the District Education Officers. On this, the Court asked the Director, Primary Education to be personally present in the Court alongwith the Regional Deputy Director. When the two were confronted, the Director, Primary Education, pointed out that way back in March 2009, he had directed all concerned to immediately send detailed statements of liability so that proper fund allocation could be made to implement the judgment of this Court. He produced before this Court the statement which the Regional Deputy Director. Education, had sent. That statement was sent to the Director on 17.11.2009 only and received by the Director on 19th November, 2009 only. The Director, thus, explained that he had been after the officers to send detailed calculation in absence whereof he could not arrange for the compliance of this order. The Regional Deputy Director Education 'splea that he had long ago done his job was falsified on the face of it. Thus, this Court directed initiation of proceedings against the Regional Deputy Director, Education, as well as the District Education Officers, concerned. They have filed their show causes. What facts I have noted above are from the show cause as was filed.

(3.) LET the matter now be placed for compliance on 2nd February, 2010 as ordered earlier.