HC stays holding of exams for appointment of headmasters

PATNA: The Patna high court on Tuesday stayed holding of exams for appointment of headmasters in nationalised primary schools in the state till further orders.
The rules formed for their appointment and service conditions have been challenged over mandatory condition of eight-year regular service experience for qualification and alleged ambiguity in English and Hindi versions of the law.
Bihar National Primary School Headmaster (Appointment, Transfer, Disciplinary Action and Service Condition) Rules, 2021, was formed in August this year. Overall, creation of 40,158 posts of headmasters in nationalised primary schools was okayed by the state cabinet on September 7, 2021.
Two separate writ petitions were filed in the high court by TET-STET Uttirn Niyojit Shikshak Sangh and TET Prarambhik Shikshak Sangh, which urged the court to declare Section 6(V)(A) of Rule as “ultra vires” under which minimum eight years of regular service experience is mandatory for qualifying as headmaster.
Petitioners have argued that no such condition has been put for graduate teachers and they would be eligible for appointment only with their service confirmation.
Petitioners have also urged the court that clarification be sought on Section 6 (IV) of the rules as its English and Hindi versions seem different.
“The government should be directed that condition in Section 6 (IV) of English version that a candidate must have qualified TET in 2012 or onwards for appointment as headmaster should prevail,” they said.
In Hindi, word ‘niyukt’ has been added in Section 6 (IV) and according to the petitioners, only those teachers appointed in 2012 or onwards with TET qualification would be eligible for the post of headmaster.
The petitioners have urged the court that all basic-grade TET teachers be allowed to participate in selection process till disposal of the petitions.
Appearing for state, advocate general Lalit Kishore submitted that the ambiguity in English and Hindi versions was due to typing error and it would be rectified.
A counter affidavit on behalf of the state government was filed, but the division bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice PB Bajanthri remained dissatisfied with it.
Counsels Mrityunjay Kumar, Arinjay Kumar, Kumar Shanu and Amrit Kumar appeared for the petitioners.
After hearing both sides, the court directed state government to file another counter affidavit within four weeks. It will now hear the petitions on December 7.