- (1.) The matter has been heard with the consent of learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing. There is no complaint about any audio and visual quality. L.P.A. No.678 of 2018 The instant intra-court appeal is directed against the order/judgment dated 28.09.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.5374 of 2009, whereby and whereunder, the writ petition has been dismissed declining to interfere with the selection of respondent no.7 against the post of Para Teacher made by Gram Shiksha Samiti on 24.11.2007.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are required to be referred herein which reads as hereunder:- The writ petitioner had applied for the post of Para Teacher for Primary School, Chanditalla, for which, Gram Shiksha Samiti was held on 02.07.2007 by the Samiti. The writ petitioner was found to be eligible and accordingly, the Gram Siksha Samiti with the consent of Aam Sabha has selected the writ petitioner for the aforesaid post vide its meeting dated 02.07.2007. The writ petitioner was selected amongst seven candidates who had participated in the process of selection, wherein, the writ petitioner was found to be secured highest marks and was the only person belonging to the same village. Thereafter, another Aam Sabha was conveyed on 23.09.2007 on account of some objection made by the Block Co-ordination Officer on the selection made by Samiti on 02.07.2007. Again in the meeting held on 23.09.2007, the writ petitioner was selected as Para Teacher with the consent of Aam Sabha and Samiti but the writ petitioner has not received appointment letter. A meeting was conducted again on 24.11.2007 of the Gram Shiksha Samiti, in which the respondent no.7 has been selected as Para Teacher by the Samiti. The reason was recorded for selection of respondent no.7 to the effect that the selection of respondent no.7 as Para Teacher has been found to be fit, as because there was not a single suitable candidate available in the village. The writ petitioner has contended that although he has passed "Alim Degree" in the year 2007 which is equivalent to graduate degree as has been notified by the Jharkhand Academic Council dated 16.09.2006 and therefore, the writ petitioner after found to be eligible, has rightly been selected twice but only in order to accommodate the respondent no.7, no appointment letter has been issued in his favour rather the respondent no.7 has been appointed and to that effect, a representation was filed before the competent authority but having not giving any heed to that, the writ petitioner has approached to this court by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying inter-alia therein for quashing of selection of respondent no.7. The State has appeared and filed a detailed counter affidavit, wherein, it has been stated that although the writ petitioner was found to be successful in the meeting held on 02.07.2007 of the Aam Sabha apart from six other candidates, basis upon the performance of one or the other candidate, a merit list was prepared in which, the writ petitioner has been found to be top in the merit list which was sent by the Village Education Committee for due approval to the Block Level Committee and the Block Level Committee has found that School in question is a Hindi Medium School and there is no Unit for "Urdu Teacher" and therefore, asked clarification from the Secretary-cum-Head Teacher from the concerned school as to how the teaching of Urdu was being given without any creation of post of Urdu Teacher. Thereafter, again a meeting was conducted on 24.11.2007, in which the respondent no.7 has been selected as Para Teacher in the said school assigning the reason that the respondent no.7 is the student of B.A. Part-II and belongs to adjacent village Karkarbona. Thereafter, the selection of respondent no.7 was approved by the Block Level Committee in its meeting dated 26.11.2007. It has further been stated that from the comparative assessment of the candidature of the writ petitioner vis- -vis the respondent no.7, it was found that the qualification of the writ petitioner is from Madarsa Board while the teaching of Urdu Syllabus or other subject is not possible in a Hindi Medium Government School without creation of Urdu Teacher post and as such, the writ petitioner has not found to be a suitable candidate for the said post, hence, the respondent no.7 has been appointed. The respondent no.7 had appeared and contested the case by taking the plea before the learned Single Judge that he has been appointed after following the due procedure of law and he is continuing on the post in question since after his selection. Reply to counter affidavit has been filed by the writ petitioner, wherein, it has been stated that the writ petitioner was not appointed as Urdu Teacher rather he has only been appointed taking into consideration the "Alim Degree" which is equivalent to graduation and while taking such degree, he has studied Hindi, Economics, English as a compulsory subject along with History as optional subject. In his Maulvi Examination which is equivalent to intermediate, he has cleared compulsory subjects like English, Math and Hindi etc. Further, it has been stated that the writ petitioner belongs to the same village and had the highest qualification amongst the candidates who had participated in the process of selection, while the respondent no.7 belongs to other village and has got less qualification in comparison to that of the writ petitioner. The reference of guidelines has been made issued by the Human Resource Development Department, wherein, it has been provided to give preference to the local villagers and highly qualified candidates for the purpose of selection of Para Teachers and taking into consideration this aspect of the matter, the writ petitioner has been selected twice by the Village Committee but subsequently reviewing its own decision, the respondent no.7 has been appointed. The learned Single Judge after taking into consideration the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties has declined to interfere with the selection of respondent no.7 by dismissing the writ petition which has been assailed before this Court under the intra-court appeal.
(3.) Mr. Uday Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the appellantwrit petitioner has submitted that the writ Court has not appreciated the fact that the Village Level Committee has selected the writ petitioner twice taking into consideration his qualification and his place of resident and after finding him more meritorious in comparison to other candidates, he has been selected vide its meeting dated 02.07.2007 but the appointment letter has not been issued and again a meeting was conducted on 23.09.2007, in which, again the decision taken by the Committee on 02.07.2007 has been reiterated by finding the writ petitioner fit for selection as Para Teacher but instead of issuing appointment letter, the Committee has recommended the respondent no.7 to be appointed as Para Teacher mainly on the ground that the writ petitioner has got "Alim Degree" which is equivalent to graduate treating him to be the teacher of Urdu Subject, without appreciating the fact that while taking the "Alim Degree", he has also studied Hindi, Economics, English as a compulsory subject along with History as optional subject, in which he has found to be qualified and hence, the reasoning given by the learned Single Judge that since the writ petitioner has obtained "Alim Degree" and since there is no post of Urdu Teacher, it would not be appropriate for selection of Urdu Teacher in the said School, is contrary to the factual situation since herein the writ petitioner although has got "Alim Degree" but along with other subjects, he has also been found to be qualified, hence, it cannot be construed that since the writ petitioner has obtained "Alim Degree", he could only be able to teach Urdu subject, is absolutely incorrect finding of the learned Single Judge. Further, submission has been made by referring to annexure-6 and annexure-7 to the memo of appeal, wherein "Alim Degree" has been treated to be equivalent to graduation by the Jharkhand Academic Council by following the decision taken by the Bihar School Examination Board based upon the order passed by the Personnel Administrative Reforms Department of the Erstwhile State of Bihar as contained in order no.8 R/1010/76 C.K./4226 dated 01.03.1977 and hence, once "Alim Degree" has been treated to be equivalent to graduation, there is no reason of denial of candidature of the writ petitioner on the basis of the fact that the writ petitioner has not been able to produce the graduation degree. In that view of the matter, the order passed by the learned Single Judge is not sustainable in the eye of law, as such, the same is fit to be set aside. ;