Patna High Court Orders No Exams For Director Recruitment | Patna News

PATNA: Patna’s high court on Tuesday ordered that no exams for the recruitment of school principals in nationalized primary schools be passed until further notice.
The rules established for their appointment and their terms of service were challenged on the mandatory requirement of eight years of regular service experience as one of the essential elements for qualification and on the alleged ambiguity in the English and Hindi versions of the law.
The Director of Bihar National Primary School Rules (Appointment, Transfer, Disciplinary Action and Terms of Service), 2021, were formed in August of this year. Overall, the creation of 40,158 principal positions in the same number of nationalized primary schools was approved by the state government cabinet on September 7, 2021.
Two separate petitions were filed in the High Court by TET-STET Uttirn Niyojit Shikshak Sangh and TET Prarambhik Shikshak Sangh urging it to declare Article 6 (V) (A) of the ultra-vires rule under which to At least eight years of regular service as the basic grade of panchayat or urban primary teacher of panchayati raj or urban body institution is compulsory for the title of director.
The petitioners insisted that no such conditions were placed on graduate teachers and that they would only be eligible with confirmation of their service.
The petitioners also requested that clarification be sought on Article 6 (IV) of the rules, the English and Hindi versions of which appear to be different.
The petitioners urged HC to order the government that the condition in section 6 (IV) of the English version that a candidate must have qualified the TET in 2012 or beyond as an essential qualification to be appointed director should prevail.
In Hindi, the word “niyukt” has been added to section 6 (IV), which the petitioners urge to mean that teachers appointed in 2012 or later with a TET qualification would be eligible for the post of principal.
They also urged that all basic TET teachers be allowed to participate in the selection process until the petitions are eliminated.
Appearing for the state, Advocate General Lalit Kishore argued that the ambiguity in the English and Hindi versions is due to a typing error and that it would be rectified.
A counter affidavit on behalf of the state government, but the division bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice PB Bajanthri remained unsatisfied.
Representing the applicants, counsel Mrityunjay Kumar, Arinjay Kumar, Kumar Shanu and Amrit Kumar argued that not only the error but the eight years experience requirement for the appointment was also challenged.
After hearing from both parties, the court ordered the state government to file another counter affidavit within four weeks. She fixed December 7 to hear the petitions again.

Leave A Reply