The High Court
Case Details
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.C. (S.B.) No. 06 of 2015 ------- 1. The Chairman, Managing Committee, Mission Middle School, Gomoh, Dhanbad 2. Mission Middle School, Gomoh, Dhanbad … …. Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad 4. Birendra Kumar … …. Opp. Parties with A.C. (S.B.) No. 07 of 2015 ….. 1. The Chairman, Managing Committee, Mission Middle School, Gomoh, Dhanbad 2. Mission Middle School, Gomoh, Dhanbad … …. Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad 4. Pinki Kumari … …. Respondents with A.C. (S.B.) No. 08 of 2015 …. 1. The Chairman, Managing Committee, Mission Middle School, Gomoh, Dhanbad 2. Mission Middle School, Gomoh, Dhanbad … …. Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad 4. Rinki Kumari … …. Respondents
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY -------- For the Appellants For the State -------- : Mr. Rahul Kr. Gupta & J.N. Upadhyay, Advocates : Mr. K. K. Singh, S.C.-VI : Mr. Karan Shahdeo, A.C. To S.C.II (A.C.(SB) 6/15) (A.C.(SB) 6, 7/15) (A.C.(SB) 8/15) : Mr. Rishikesh Giri, Advocate (A.C.(SB) 7/15) For Respondent No.4 : Mr. A. K. Sahani, Advocate -------- Oral Order 21 / Dated : 02.03.2023 All three appeals have been filed under Section 15 of the Jharkhand Education Tribunal, Act 2005 by the Management of the School against the part of the order dated 01.05.2015 passed in Case Nos. 28/2014 (JET), 29/2014 (JET) and 2 30/2014 (JET) by Justice S.K. Chattopadhaya, Chairman of JET and Mr. A.C. Ranjan, Administrative Member of JET. 2. Respondent no. 4 in all these appeals are the teachers of the school who were appointed as Assistant Teachers in Mission Middle School, Gomoh, Dhanbad in pursuant to the appointment process initiated by the advertisement published on 08.08.2013. In this process, the selection committee was constituted and on the basis of the interview, Birendra Kumar, Pinki Kumari and Rinki Kumari R-4 in A.C.(SB) Nos.6, 7 and 8 respectively were selected. 3. The selection of the candidates was placed for confirmation before the Managing Committee to Mission Middle School, Gomoh and their selection was duly approved and the appointment letters were issued with effect from 18.12.2013. In the appointment letter, the monthly salary and other allowances have been specified to be paid as at par as per the government approved salary scale after the approval of the appointment by the State Government. All the three respondents joined the post of assistant teacher in the school 4. None of the respondent no. 4 has been given salary although they were serving the school since their appointment in the year 2013. It was against this background that respondent Birendra Kumar filed Case No. 28/2014 before the Chairman, JET claiming his salary and the Tribunal vide its order dated 01.05.2015 directed the appellant to pay at least 50% of the salary and allowance from the date of his joining and with liberty to adjust the advance payment as and when the Management receives the approval and grant for their payment. The order of payment of 50% to the respondents passed by the Tribunal is under challenge in these three appeals. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel Sri Rahul Kumar Gupta for the appellant school that the appeals have been preferred mainly on the ground that the salary of the teachers of the school are to be paid by the Government as it is 100% aided school and without allotment of fund to the school, payment of the teachers cannot be done because the school has no other source to make the payment. Learned Tribunal failed to take into consideration that the school was 100% aided religious minority school and the salary is upon grant given by the State Government. 6. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.11.2018 held that there was no prima facie illegality in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and directed the appellant to comply the order without any further delay by making advance to the teachers appointed by them. 7. It is submitted in this regard that the Interlocutory Applications bearing I.A. Nos. 289/19, 284/19 and 516/19 have been filed under Section 151 of C.P.C. for modification of the order dated 30.11.2018 wherein it has been stated that there are three different account in the name of Mission Middle School, Gomoh. 3 Annexing the copy of pass-book it is submitted that the school does not have any resource to make the payment in compliance to the order of this Court and hence a prayer for modification of the order has been made. 8. The main contention of the appellant is that the appointment of the teachers was subject to confirmation by the State Government but till date the said confirmation has not been received. 9. The State in its counter affidavit submits that vide Letter No. 2276 dated 22.07.2013 permission was granted to School Managing Committee for appointment of teachers in question. Advertisement was published in the newspapers on 08.08.2013 and as per the advertisement, minimum requisite educational qualification for the candidate was intermediate pass with teachers training from NCTE recognized institution and TET. 10. The Secretary of the School Managing Committee has responded to the letter dated 29.04.2015 Vide letter dated 13.03.2018 the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad addressed to the Secretary, Mission Middle School, Gomoh returned the proposal for confirmation of the three appointed teachers on the ground that the appointment was not as per the regulation as the candidates from the commerce course were not eligible for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher. 11. In reply, the appellant school furnished the requisite information by letter dated 03.10.2019 which has been annexed as Annexure-G Series of the rejoinder to counter affidavit. 12. With regard to the objection raised by the State, on the basis of letter dated 13.03.2018, addressed by the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad to the Secretary, Mission Middle School, Gomoh, it is submitted that the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad was the member of the Selection Committee and throughout the appointment process starting from the advertisement for the post till the result was published. This objection was never raised at any stage. It is now said that the candidates from the commerce stream were not to be appointed. 13. The evasive and general response of the DSE is apparent from the fact that out of three candidates, only one namely Rinki Kumar, is from commerce stream,. The ground for not confirming is merely a ploy and no cogent reason has been assigned for non-confirmation. 14. Irony of the matter is that in the judgment delivered by the Jharkhand Education Tribunal dated 01.05.2015, a definite finding has been recorded in paras 14 and 15 that the respondent no. 4 of all the appeals were duly appointed after proper interview and selection and were issued the appointment letters. The Managing Committee have in its meeting dated 16.12.2013 approved the 4 appointment and authorized the Secretary of the school to send proposal of their appointment to District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad. This part of finding regarding the appointment has not been challenged by the State and after three years of the Judgment of JET where specific direction was given to expedite the process of approval of the appointment in 2018, the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad has come up with a new stand that the candidates are not eligible for appointment. 15. Mr. Rishikesh Giri, learned counsel for respondent no. 4-Rinki Kumar in A.C. (S.B.) No. 08 of 2015, has submitted that the advertisements were made in pursuance of the letter of the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad dated 22.07.2013 (Annexure-A to counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 4 in A.C. (S.B.) No. 08 of 2015) wherein there is no reference of the eligibility criteria of being commerce graduate. It is specifically stated to be intermediate trained from NCET of the State Government. Beyond this the new eligibility criterion that is being raised, as a ground for non-confirmation of the appointees, was neither in the letter of the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad to advertise the post nor in the advertisement dated 08.08.2013 published in Daily Hindustan. 16. The issue of appointment to the post of assistant teacher from the commerce stream came for consideration in W.P. (S) No. 963 of 2017 and other analogous cases wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.09.2019 where the respondents were directed to reconsider the case of the petitioners for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in Classes VI and VII under Social Science subject with back wages. Against this order, L.P.A. No. 122 of 2020 and other analogous appeals were filed before the Division Bench of this Court which have been dismissed vide order dated 20.02.2023 and the State has taken decision to appoint the candidates including those who were from commerce stream, as assistant teacher in Social Science stream. 17. Lastly, it is submitted that even today in Government Aided Minority School advertisements are made on similar eligibility criteria for appointment to the post of assistant teacher. 18. After having considered the submission advanced on behalf of all the parties, it is apparent that the selection process was duly advertised in which the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad was the member of the Selection Committee. At no stage, any objection regarding the eligibility criteria for the post of assistant teacher was raised. After the appointment process had been completed, the matter was referred for confirmation to the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad, post hoc a new objection has been raised regarding eligibility criteria, which did not exist in the earlier letter of District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad by which the advertisements were published. The Jharkhand 5 Education Tribunal in its order dated 01.05.2015 held that the appointment process was duly followed and directed the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad to expedite the process of approval which has been observed in non-compliance till date. Consequently, the candidates who have been appointed and rendering their services as assistant teacher since 2013 are not getting their salary. The School Management has filed an interlocutory application stating therein that it has no resource to pay the salary of the teachers. The school is a government aided institution and in absence of allotment of fund, they have no other source to make payment of salary to the teachers. Under the circumstance, the objection raised by the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad vide letter dated 20.09.2017 and letter dated 13.03.2018 regarding new eligibility criteria of the selected candidate is without any basis. The Managing Committee of the school in question will send the prepositional statement to the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad will send the prepositional statement henceforth to the Director, Primary Education for final approval within two months thereafter and the Director, Primary Education will take necessary steps for approval of the prepositional statement within a period of two months thereafter. I.A. Nos. 289/19, 284/19 and 516/19 are allowed and the earlier order for payment is modified, exempting the appellant school from making payment.
Decision
All the three appeals are accordingly disposed of. AKT (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)