PRASHANT KUMAR, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 4.10.2005 passed in W.P(S) No. 705 of 2004 by learned Single Judge whereby and whereunder the writ application was allowed and the impugned order as contained in Annexure -11 of the writ application was quashed. The learned Single Judge further directed that the respondent/writ petitioner is entitled to be regularized as Headmaster of the school w.e.f. 02.10.1987 and is also entitled to get the salary in the scale of regular Headmaster of the High School. The learned Single Judge has further directed that the respondent/writ petitioner is entitled to get the arrears of difference of pay till the date of his retirement including all consequential benefits. The learned Single Judge further directed that the arrears of difference of pay and other pensionary benefits calculated on the said scale must be paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the said order. It is also directed that if the said arrears and other admissible benefits are not paid within the said period, the respondent/writ petitioner shall be further entitled to get an additional compensatory interest @ 5% per annum which shall be payable over and above the statutory interest admissible.
(2.) IT appears that the respondent/writ petitioner Ram Narayan Yadav had filed the aforesaid writ petition praying therein the following relief: (A) For direction to the respondents to regularize and approve the service of the petitioner as Headmaster of Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav High School, Kokar, Ranchi w.e.f. the date he completed 7 years from the date of recognition of the school or take -over of the school (i.e. w.e.f. 6.12.1985 or 2.10.1987). (B) For payment of the arrear salary admissible in law in the scale of Headmaster w.e.f. 6.12.1985 or 02.10.1987 along with all other admissible dues and benefits as admissible. (C) For any other appropriate relief(s) to which the petitioner may be found entitled in law. It further appears that during the pendency of the said writ application on the direction of this Court the representation of the respondent/writ petitioner was disposed of vide order contained in Memo No. 2276 dated 30.8.2005 (Annexure -11) which was also challenged by the respondent/writ petitioner through Interlocutory Application. The case of respondent/writ petitioner is that Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav High School, Kokar, Ranchi was established in the year 1974. It is further submitted by the respondent/writ petitioner that he has passed M.A. Examination from Ranchi University in the year 1973 whereas he obtained the degree of graduation from Bihar University in the year 1965 and he obtained the degree of B.Ed in the year 1970. It is further stated that he was appointed as Headmaster of the said school by the order of secretary dated 2.1.1974 and he joined on the post of Headmaster of the said school on 2.1.1974 itself. It is further stated that the school in question was given temporary permission for establishment on 26.3.1976 and on 6.12.1978 the school was permanently recognized by the competent authority. It is further stated that in the order of recognisation, the petitioner was shown as In -charge Headmaster. It is then stated that on 2.10.1980 the school in question was taken over by the government in pursuance of provisions contained in Bihar Non Government Secondary Schools (Taking over of Management and Control) Ordinance, 1980. It is further stated that as the respondent/writ petitioner was founder Headmaster of the aforesaid school, therefore, on completion of seven years from the date of take over of the school i.e. 2.10.1987 he made a representation to the concerned authorities for recognizing him as Headmaster of the said school and make payment of the salary prescribed for Headmaster. It is then submitted that the then District Education Officer, Ranchi had recommended the case of respondent/writ petitioner to the higher authority vide annexure -4 to the writ application. It is further stated that when the competent authority has not given any heed to the representation of respondent/writ petitioner, he filed a writ application bearing C.W.J.C. No. 2387 of 1990(R) for issuance of a writ of Mandamus commanding the competent authority to grant the aforesaid relief to the respondent/writ petitioner. However, it is stated that unfortunately the said writ application was dismissed vide order dated 02.07.1998 for non prosecution. It is further stated that thereafter the respondent/writ petitioner again filed representation before the concerned authority but in vain, thereafter the present writ application has been filed.
(3.) THE appellants who are respondents in the writ application had contested the claim of respondent/writ petitioner by filing counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavits. Their case in brief is that since the earlier writ application was dismissed for non prosecution, the present writ application is not maintainable after lapse of six years. It is also stated by the appellants that a Headmaster of a un -recognized school does not automatically become a government servant of a nationalized school on take over nor does he automatically become the Headmaster of the nationalized school. It is further submitted by the appellants that examination of, qualification and suitability, of a Headmaster is a precondition for appointment to government service or for Headmaster of the nationalized school. It is stated by the appellants that as per the government circular contained in memo No. 511 dated 20.11.1981 the founder Headmaster can only be recognized as a Headmaster of the school taken over by government if on the date of take over i.e. 2.10.1980 he possesses the qualification and other eligibility for holding the post of Headmaster. It is further stated that one of the eligibility for holding the post of Headmaster as per the aforesaid circular dated 20.11.1981 is minimum seven years teaching experience in a recognized school. It is further stated by the appellants that the respondent/writ petitioner have no such teaching experience on the date of take over i.e. 2.10.1980 and therefore he is not entitled to be recognized as Headmaster of the concerned school. It appears that keeping in view the aforesaid circular, the appellants rejected the representation of writ petitioner vide Annexure -11 of the writ application.;