Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (S) No. 4713 of 2013 … Smt. Anjali Sarangi ... … Petitioner -V e r s u s- 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 2. The Director (Secondary Education), Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Kolhan Division, Chaibasa 4. The District Education Officer, Singhbhum at Jamshedpur … ... Respondents … CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH … For the Petitioner : - M/s Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Respondent : - Mr. Prem Pujari Roy, JC to GA ... 07/15.06.2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The narrow compass within which the controversy raised herein lies is whether petitioner's services as Assistant Teacher in Project Girls High School Kharsawan, Saraikela Kharsawan should be recognized by the State or not. The petitioner is said to have been appointed on 23.05.1984 vide Annexure-2 in the said school, whose selection was approved in a meeting held on 19.03.1985 by the State authorities of then Bihar. The petitioner was having the qualification of B. A. (Hons.) at the relevant point of time and acquired the Teacher Training Diploma from Sister Nivedita Training College in 1993. The claim for recognition of services of such Teachers of Project Girls High School, which were selected by then State Government of Bihar, were considered by the 3 Men Committee constituted by the Successor State of Jharkhand as well namely Allam committee pursuant to the direction passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 6626-6681 of 2001 contained in judgment dated 03.01.2006. The Allam Committee vide its report at Annexure-1 to the writ petition and also Annexure-B to the counter affidavit, rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that she acquired Teacher Training Qualification from Sister Nivedita Training College, Kolkata which was not recognized by the State Government. The relevant findings of the 3 Men Committee at Annexure-1, however, also indicates that petitioner at the time of her appointment on 23.05.1984 in the subject of English was having the qualification of Honours in Graduation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant ground of rejection is, however, no longer tenable in law as not only the National Council for Teachers Education Act came into force on 1st July, 1995 and would not be retrospectively applied to the certificates granted by the said college prior to that date, but the said issue has also been considered in a number of judgment rendered by this Court as well. The judgments relied upon by the petitioner are at Annexure-7 series to the rejoinder i.e. W. P. (S) No. 6038 of 2010 in the case of Umesh Kumar Sharma and in W. P. (S) No. 5658 of 2009 in the case of Om Prakash Gope. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Umesh Kumar Sharma had acquired Teachers Training on 29.09.1992 from Sister Nivedita Training College, Kolkata as is evident from the judgment passed in his case. The petitioner- Om Prakash Gope had also cleared the Teacher Training Certificate Examination on 16.03.1994 from the said college. It is submitted that considering all aspects of the matter, learned Single Bench of this Court in the aforesaid two judgments, directed the respondents to pass necessary orders in the matter of recognition of services of the said petitioners and release the consequential benefits. It is submitted that the judgment passed in their cases have also been complied with such as vide notification dated 05.06.2012 in the case of Om Prakash Gope, which is part of the said rejoinder, issued by the Principal Secretary of the Human Resources Development Department. Therefore, the prayer made in the present writ petition should also be considered by the respondent on similar line. Learned counsel for the respondent- State who has appeared and filed counter affidavit has placed reliance upon the findings of the 3 Men Committee's report as per which petitioner had later on acquired the Teacher's Training qualification from Sister Nivedita Training College, Kolkata in the year 1993 which was not recognized by the State Government. Therefore, the Allam Committee did not make recommendation for regularization of her services. Apart from that, learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the findings recorded by the learned Single Bench of this Court in the case of Umesh Kumar Sharma and Om Prakash Gope, who also appear to have cleared the Teachers Training Certificate Examination from the same Sister Nivedita Training College, Kolkata sometime in the year 1992 and 1994 and i.e. before coming into force of N.C.T.E. Act. This aspect of the matter however appears to have escaped the attention of the respondents while refusing to consider the claim of the petitioner for recognition of her services in the said school on the post of Assistant Teacher in English Subject. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and the judgments rendered by the learned Single Bench of this Court earlier (Annexure-7 series), it therefore appears that the respondents are required to consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law after taking into account the legal position settled by this Court . In such circumstances, the writ petition is being disposed of by directing the respondent no.2, the Director (Secondary Education),Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi to take a decision on the claim of the petitioner for recognition of her services in Project Girls High School as Assistant Teacher in English subject in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order duly supported with petitioner's representation enclosing all necessary documents and judgments upon which she seeks to rely. It is observed that since the matter is remanded to the respondent no. 2, the Director (Secondary Education),Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi for reconsideration of the aforesaid issue in the light of the judgment rendered by this Court earlier, the findings of the 3 Men Committee against the petitioner shall not come in his way in taking a fresh decision. Depending upon such decision, the consequential benefits would also be released in favour of the petitioner, thereafter. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) Mohanti/Kamlesh