Judgment:
Barin Ghosh and Ajay Kumar Tripathi, JJ.
1. In relation to claim for bringing the teachers of private schools taken over by the government from time to time within the ambit of government employment, many litigations, as were filed, were ultimately concluded by a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of State of Bihar and Ors. v. Project Uchcha Vidya Shikshak Sangh and Ors. reported in 2006 (1) PLJR 483. By that judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the State Government to constitute a committee to ascertain the case of individual such teachers who claimed to be entitled to be treated as taken over employees of the State and accordingly the Government has constituted a committee.
2. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that the committee constituted by the State Government has already started considering the cases of various such claimants and they are progressing on the basis of yearwise acquisitions.
3. By the judgment and order impugned in this appeal, the learned Single Judge, who dealt with the writ petition, ultimately directed consideration of the case of the writ petitioner by the Screening Committee keeping in view of the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the judgment impugned, but at the same time provided in the judgment that the Screening Committee may consider the case of the Respondent No. 4, being the appellant before us but before considering her case, the Screening Committee may satisfy itself whether the Respondent No. 4 was validly appointed against any sanctioned post on or before the relevant date.
4. The instant appeal has been preferred by the Respondent No. 4 in the writ petition in view of various observations made against her in the judgment in question. Having regard to the liberty granted for consideration of the case of the Respondent No. 4 by the Screening Committee in the penultimate sentence of the said judgment, any observation made against the Respondent No. 4 above the said sentence, is of no effect for the learned Judge did not direct the Screening Committee to keep in mind those observations while considering the case of the Respondent No. 4.
5. In view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, referred to above, the Screening Committee now stands substituted by a Committee to be appointed by the State Government in terms of the said judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and accordingly we do not feel that there is any necessity for interfering with the judgment and order under appeal, and leave the matter to be decided by the Committee appointed by the Government.
6. This disposes of the letters patent appeal.