Patna High Court
Rajiv KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The removal order is set aside and the petitioners are to be reinstated with all consequential benefits.
Summary
The petitioners, Runa Devi (widow of a deceased teacher) and Rajiv Kumar, were appointed as Assistant Teachers on compassionate grounds and were required to complete a Diploma in Elementary Education (DE) training. Although other teachers were given multiple opportunities to appear for the training examinations, the petitioners were never sent for training or allowed to sit for the exams. Consequently, they were removed from service by Memo No. 2563 dated 15‑07‑2023. The petitioners challenged the removal, arguing that the authorities violated the guidelines and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which mandates training within three years. The State contended that failure to pass the training made their continuance illegal. The Court held that the petitioners were denied the statutory opportunity for training, found the removal unlawful, set aside the impugned order and directed their reinstatement with all consequential benefits.
Issues considered
- Whether the removal of compassionate‑appointment teachers who have not been given the opportunity to undergo the required DE training is lawful under the RTE Act, 2009 and related guidelines.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to reinstatement with back wages and benefits.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- compassionate appointment
- teacher training
- Right to Education Act
- reinstatement
- illegal removal
- civil writ jurisdiction
- untrained teacher
- examination opportunity
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7084 of 2025
======================================================
Runa Devi, Wife of Late Jokhan Ram, Resident of village- Sisavaniya, P. O.-
Ramgarhwa, P. S.- Ram garhwa, District- East Champaran-845433.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Director (Primary Education), Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.
3. The District Education Officer, East Champaran, Motihari.
4. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), East Champaran, Motihari.
5. The Headmaster, Middle School, Ramgarhwa Kanya, East Champaran,
Motihari .
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9789 of 2025
======================================================
Rajiv Kumar Son of Late Chandrashekhar Mishra Resident of Village-
Damodarpur, P.S.- Areraj, District- East Champaran- 845425.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Director (Primary Education), Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.
3. The District Education Officer, East Champaran, Motihari.
4. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), East Champaran, Motihari.
5. The Headmaster, Up Graded Middle School, Barai Tola (East), Block-
Areraj, East Champaran, Motihari.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7084 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Tiwari, Adv.
Mr.Lal Mani Sharma, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binod Yadav, SC 18
Mr. AC to SC 18
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9789 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Tiwari, Adv.
Mr.Lal Mani Sharma, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC 25
Mr. AC to SC 25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 10-02-2026
Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners in both the writ petitions are
Patna High Court CWJC No.7084 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
2/5
aggrieved with the common order as contained in Memo No.
2563 dated 15.07.2023 issued under the signature of the District
Education Officer, East Champaran, Motihari, the respondent
No. 3, by which they have been removed from their services
with effect from the date of issuance of the said order.
3. The facts are admitted to the extent that on the
recommendation of the District Compassionate Appointment
Committee, the petitioners were duly appointed on the post of
Assistant Teacher in the Matric Untrained pay scale of Rs.3050-
4590/- and was posted in the respective allotted schools. Since
the petitioners were appointed as Untrained Teacher, hence
subsequently they were registered in Diploma in Elementary
Education (ODL) courses for the session 2013-15 through the
Department itself. The Examination of the ODL was conducted
in October-November, 2018 which was the last examination and
the result was published on 31.03.2019 which was decided by
the Department to be the last chance for the training. Thereafter,
the petitioners and others have never been allowed to complete
the examination and now in the meantime, the impugned order
contained in Memo No. 2563 dated 15.07.2023 came to be
passed and the petitioners have been removed from their
services.
Patna High Court CWJC No.7084 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
3/5
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted
that by the impugned order altogether 11 persons have been
removed from their services, who were appointed on
compassionate ground, but they could not pass their Teachers
Training Examination. Aggrieved with the afore noted order,
some of the Assistant Teachers namely, Mritunjay Kumar,
Ashutosh Kumar Pandey, Mala Kumari @ Mala Devi and
Mohammad Istyak Alam have approached this Court by filing
separate writ petition bearing CWJC Nos.3484 of 2024, 6679 of
2024, 16767 of 2023 and 17297 of 2023, respectively. A Bench
of this Court having considered the fact that the petitioners are
not at fault, rather the respondent authorities had not acted as
per the guidelines and not extended the opportunity to appear
in Diploma in Elementary Education (OLD) Examination
inspite of the fact that according to the guidelines the Trainee
Teachers were granted more opportunity to clear examination,
set aside the impugned order vide different orders; copies of the
orders have been placed on record as Annexure P/9 series.
Referring to the afore noted order, on instruction, it is further
contended that now the petitioners of those writ petitions have
been reinstated to their services and they have been discharging
their duties but discrimination has been caused and the
Patna High Court CWJC No.7084 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
4/5
petitioners have been left in lurch by removing them from their
services.
5. On the other hand, learned Senior
Advocate/Advocate for the State submitted that under the
provision of RTE Act, 2009 it has become mandatory for all
untrained teachers to acquire training one way or another within
a stipulated three years period. However, since the petitioners
have not passed the Teachers Training Examination, hence their
continuance as Assistant Teacher is wholly bad in law. The
entire action has been taken in compliance with the order passed
in CWJC No. 16214 of 2019 [Md. Ataur Rahman & Ors. vs.
The State of Bihar & Ors.].
6. This Court has considered the submissions
advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties
and also took note of the facts, especially the order passed by
this Court whereby the impugned order as contained in Memo
No. 2563 dated 15.07.2023 came to be set aside by holding as
follows:
“6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties
and going through the materials available on
record, it is not in dispute that the teachers
appointed on compassionate ground were given
opportunity for training but at no point of time the
petitioner was provided such opportunity for
Patna High Court CWJC No.7084 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
5/5
training by sending the petitioner for training like
other teachers appointed on compassionate
ground. More over, the teachers who have failed in
passing the training examination, were/have been
granted 2nd opportunity to clear the examination.
Even the teachers who failed in CET, were given
three/four opportunities to clear the same but no
opportunity has even been granted by the
respondents to the petitioner to complete the
training course by sending the petitioner for
obtaining training from any training college.”
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and the position of
law, this Court finds substance in the writ petitions and
accordingly, the present writ petitions also stand allowed. The
impugned order contained in Memo No. 2563 dated 15.07.2023
is hereby set aside qua the petitioners. The petitioners are also
directed to be reinstated with all consequential benefits as has
been extended to other identically situated persons in terms with
the afore noted order.
(Harish Kumar, J)
Anjani/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 12.02.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…