Rajesh Kumar vs Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar

In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has sought for direction upon the respondents to accept and confirm the appointment of the

petitioner as Para Teacher in Up-graded Primary School, Bardehiya, Mohanpur, District Deoghar and further for direction upon the respondents to

pay the honorarium amount from 12.01.2010 till date.

Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Radha Krishna Gupta, Associate Counsel to learned G.P. VI for

the respondents-State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the establishment of the school in question in the year 2009, the petitioner is imparting

education to the children. It has further been submitted that on the basis of letter dated 05.01.2010 issued from the office of Block Education Officer,

Mohanpur, ‘Village Education Committee’ was established on 12.01.2010, which recommended the name of Puran Rai and the present

petitioner as Para Teacher in the aforesaid school. But the Block Education Committee with ulterior motive recommended the name of one Parmila

Kumari to District Establishment Committee in place of petitioner, against which the petitioner even represented before District Superintendent of

Education on 07.04.2010, but, it did not evoke any response.

Repudiating the argument canvassed by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents-State submitted that the name of

petitioner was recommended by the Village Education Committee in its meeting dated 12.01.2010 subject to approval of Block Education Committee.

It has further been submitted that as per the provisions contained in ‘The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009â€​, which is

applicable to the State of Jharkhand w.e.f 01.04.2010, the minimum qualification of Para Teacher shall be Intermediate Trained. As the petitioner was

not possessing the requisite qualification of Intermediate Trained, his name was not approved by the Block Education Committee.

In view of the specific averments made by learned counsel for the respondents-State that the petitioner does not possess the requisite qualification,

which is required as per the Act of 2009 and this fact has not been sufficiently denied by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view

that the petitioner is not eligible to be appointed on the post of Para Teachers and no relief, as sought for, by the petitioner can be granted.

Hence, the writ application, being devoid of any merit, is dismissed.

       Â

         Â