PRASUN KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR WITH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the counsel for the parties.

(2.) PRAYER of the petitioners in all these writ applications is for a direction to the respondents to consider their case for appointment as Prakhand/Panchayat teachers under Prakhand/Panchayat Teachers (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006, as trained teachers recognizing their teachers ' training degree from Bhartiya Shiskha Parishad, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, (in short, 'the Parishad '). In some of the writ applications prayer is for quashing order vide Memo No. 395, dated 30.10.2008, issued under the signature of Deputy Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, whereby teachers ' training degree from the Parishad has been considered as forged and the institution not recognized by the State of Bihar for the appointment on the post of teacher. In C.W.J.C. No. 16224 of 2008, prayer of the petitioners is for quashing the notification vide Memo No. 1337, dated 25.8.2008, issued under the signature of the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna, wherein vide paragraph 10 (vii) of the said notification degree of teachers ' training from this very institution has been held as not recognized. The institution has also been included in the list of fake University. Similarly in C.W.J.C, No. 2686 of 2007 prayer is for quashing letter no. 47, dated 12.1.2007, issued by Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Rajnaula, District -Begusarai, cancelling appointment of the petitioner as Panchayat Teacher in Primary School, Nadiparnaul, Begusarai, and also for quashing letter vide notification no. 2342, dated 14.12.2006, issued by the Director (Research & Training) Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, intimating to the concerned persons that different teachers ' training courses being run by the Parishad are not recognized by National Council for Teachers ' Education and no appointment should be made on the basis of such teachers ' training certificate. In C.W.J.C. No. 2446 of 2008 prayer of the petitioners is for quashing the order passed by the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, vide Memo No. 4306, dated 22.11.2007, declaring that the Parishad is not a recognized institution and persons who have done their teachers ' training course from this institution are not eligible for appointment on the post of trained teachers under the Bihar Panchayat and Municipal Bodies Primary Teachers Appointment and Service Rules, 2006. Similar prayer is in C.W.J.C. No. 1147 of 2008. All petitioners have prayed that a direction be issued to the respondents to consider their cases for selection/appointment on the posts of Panchayat/Prakhand Teachers and appoint them as trained Prakhand/Panchayat Teachers recognizing their teachers ' training degree from the Parishad in question.

(3.) ALMOST all the petitioners have approached this Court for more than one occasion. On earlier occasion C.W.J.C. No. 14813 of 2006 and analogous cases were considered on this very point. The matter was remitted back to the Director, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, for deciding the question of recognition of the institution and it 's degree for appointment on the post of teachers under 2006 Rules. Further, direction was that in the meantime the petitioners, who are waiting for participating in selection process, be allowed to participate, subject to the final order passed. The order was passed by the Director, Human Resources Development Department, rejecting claim of the petitioners. Challenging that order, one Shashi Kant Saroj (C.W.J.C. No. 16933 of 2008), again, approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C. No. 3562 of 2008. The impugned order was quashed. The matter was, again, remanded with a specific direction that no other persons less than Minister of the concerned Department should decide the question of recognition by passing a reasoned order. The reasoned order has been passed by the Minister of the Human Resources Development Department, which is under challenge in these writ applications. The impugned order is contained in Memo No. 395, dated 30.10.2008.