1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17438 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 38759 OF 2016]

NIRMALA KUMARI & ORS.                       Appellant(s)                                 VERSUS

STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.                  Respondent(s) WITH

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17439 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 150 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17440 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 995 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17441 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 3555 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17442 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 3564 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17443 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 5755 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17444 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 5754 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17445 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 9775 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17446 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 10746 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17447 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 10480 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17448 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 12223 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17449 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 15315 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17450 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 19696 OF 2017]

2

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17451 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 20703 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17452 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 22422 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17453 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 26690 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17454 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 26849 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17461 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 28927 OF 2017]

[DIARY NO. 24329 OF 2017] CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17455 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 22833 OF 2017] CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17456 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 23967 OF 2017] CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17457 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 22836 OF 2017] CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17458 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 26688 OF 2017] CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17459 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 24065 OF 2017] CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17484 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 29387 OF 2017] [DIARY NO. 29100 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17464 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 28930 OF 2017]

[DIARY NO. 29877 OF 2017] CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17460 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 28006 OF 2017] CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17463 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 28929 OF 2017] [DIARY NO. 31231 OF 2017]

CIVIL APPEAL  NO. 17462 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 28928 OF 2017]

[DIARY NO. 32540 OF 2017]

3

J U D G M E N T KURIAN, J. 1. The  application(s)  for  impleadment/intervention is/are allowed. 2. Leave granted. 3. In all these cases, the Panchayat teachers are sought to be removed from service on the ground that they  have  failed  to  clear  the  evaluation  test conducted by the State. 4. According to the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, as per the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher  (Employment  and  Service  Conditions)  Rules, 2006 under which they were appointed, the evaluation test was intended only for the purpose of increment and  there was  no provision  to terminate  them from service  in case  they failed  to secure  the minimum prescribed marks in the evaluation test.  However, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the State,  after  the  introduction  of  the  Right  to Education Act, 2009, the whole scheme of education, particularly at the primary level, has undergone a sea change.  Post amendment, only a candidate who has passed the Teachers’ Eligibility Test alone can be appointed,  whereas  under  the  2006  Rules,  even untrained candidates could be appointed as teachers. It is in that background that an evaluation test was made compulsory and the State also amended the rules

4

for  weeding out  the dead  wood, after  giving three chances. 5. No  doubt,  the  evaluation  test  was  originally intended for the purpose of increment, but we find from the rules that the teachers who were appointed prior to the introduction of the new Scheme are to be given training.  It is not clear as to whether the appellants herein, who have been appointed prior to the introduction of the Right to Education Act, have been given the training before subjecting them to the evaluation test. 6. In L. Muthu Kumar and Another Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others reported in (2000) 7 SCC 618, this Court  has referred  to the  need for  appointment of qualified and trained teachers, in particular, at the primary  stage.   This  Court,  in  many  cases,  has addressed  the  need  for  adequate  training.   The operative portion of the Judgment is reproduced as under :-

“14...........We  are  of  the  considered opinion that before teachers are allowed to  teach  innocent  children,  they  must receive appropriate and adequate training in  a  recognised  training  institute satisfying  the  prescribed  norms, otherwise the standard of education and careers of children will be jeopardised. In most civilised and advanced counties, the job of a teacher in a primary school

5

is  considered  an  important  and  crucial one  because  moulding  of  young  minds begins  in  primary  schools.   Allowing ill-trained  teachers  coming  out  of derecognised  or  unrecognised  institutes or licensing them to teach children of an impressionable age, contrary to the norms prescribed,  will  be  detrimental  to  the interest  of  the  nation  itself  in  the sense that in the process of building a great  nation,  teachers,  and  educational institutions also play a vital role.  In cases like these, interest of individuals cannot be  placed above  or preferred  to the larger public interest........”

7. Having heard both the parties, we are of the view that in order to give a quietus to the whole issue, it is only appropriate that the State is directed to subject  the  teachers,  who  have  failed  in  the evaluation  test  for  the  third  time,  to  a  further training  of  six  months.   At  the  end  of  such  six months,  they  shall  be  subjected  to  an  appropriate evaluation test, prescribing minimum marks.  Passing the evaluation test thus conducted, on completion of the training, would mean the successful completion of the training. 8. It is made clear that if any of the candidates fail to successfully complete the training as above, it will be open to the State to remove them from the

6

service.   9. In view of the above, these appeals are disposed of.   

No costs.       .......................J.

             [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ R. BANUMATHI ]  

New Delhi; October 31, 2017.

7

ITEM NO.7               COURT NO.5               SECTION XVI                S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)  No(s).  38759/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated  05-08-2016 in CWJC No. 10434/2016 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Patna) NIRMALA KUMARI & ORS.                              Petitioner(s)                                 VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.                  Respondent(s) (FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 2/2016  FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT)  FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT ON IA 94839/2017 WITH SLP(C) No. 3555/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 3564/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 5755/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 5754/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 9775/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 10746/2017 (XVI) (and  IA  No.95969/2017-impleading  party  and  IA No.95972/2017-EXEMPTION  FROM  FILING  O.T.  and  IA No.95978/2017-APPROPRIATE  ORDERS/DIRECTIONS  and  IA No.95981/2017-EXEMPTION  FROM  FILING  O.T.  and  IA No.109554/2017-impleading party)  SLP(C) No. 10480/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 12223/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 15315/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 150/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 995/2017 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 20703/2017 (XVI) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.53163/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP and IA No.53167/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED  JUDGMENT  and  IA  No.53165/2017-DELETING  THE  NAME  OF RESPONDENT) SLP(C) No. 19696/2017 (XVI) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.49614/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP and IA No.49618/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.49611/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE SLP and IA No.49621/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT)  SLP(C) No. 23967/2017 (XVI) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.75699/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.75701/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED  JUDGMENT  and  IA  No.75705/2017-APPLICATION  SEEKING PERMISSION TO BRING ON RECORD SUBSEQUENT EVENTS AND DOCUMENTS and

8

IA  No.75708/2017-EXEMPTION  FROM  FILING  O.T.  and  IA No.75700/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE SLP and IA No.75703/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT)  Diary No(s). 32540/2017 () (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.105845/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.105848/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.105842/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE SLP/TP and IA No.105852/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT)  SLP(C) No. 22422/2017 (XVI) (  IA  No.72858/2017-CONDONATION  OF  DELAY  IN  FILING  and  IA No.72860/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and  IA  No.72851/2017-PERMISSION  TO  FILE  SLP  and  IA No.72865/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT)  SLP(C) No. 22833/2017 (XVI) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.75715/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.75718/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED  JUDGMENT  and  IA  No.75722/2017-APPLICATION  SEEKING PERMISSION TO BRING ON RECORD SUBSEQUENT EVENTS AND DOCUMENTS and IA  No.75723/2017-EXEMPTION  FROM  FILING  O.T.  and  IA No.75717/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE SLP and IA No.75720/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT)  SLP(C) No. 22836/2017 (XVI) (IA  No.74929/2017-CONDONATION  OF  DELAY  IN  FILING  and  IA No.74934/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and  IA  No.74988/2017-EXEMPTION  FROM  FILING  O.T.  and  IA No.74932/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE SLP and IA No.74937/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT and IA No.74963/2017-PERMISSION TO PLACE ON RECORD  SUBSEQUENT  FACTS [TO BE TAKEN UP ALONGWITH ITEM NO. 48 I.E. D.NO.24704/2017])  SLP(C) No. 24065/2017 (XVI) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R.)  SLP(C) No. 26849/2017 (XVI) (IA  No.80134/2017-CONDONATION  OF  DELAY  IN  FILING  and  IA No.80135/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.80136/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)  SLP(C) No. 26690/2017 (XVI) (IA  No.80652/2017-CONDONATION  OF  DELAY  IN  FILING  and  IA No.80655/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and  IA  No.80656/2017-EXEMPTION  FROM  FILING  O.T.  and  IA No.80650/2017-PERMISSION  TO  FILE  SLP/TP   and  IA No.80657/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT)  SLP(C) No. 26688/2017 (XVI) (IA  No.81332/2017-CONDONATION  OF  DELAY  IN  FILING  and  IA No.81333/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and  IA  No.81330/2017-PERMISSION  TO  FILE  SLP/TP   and  IA No.81336/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT) Diary No(s). 29877/2017 () (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.98982/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.98984/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.98980/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE SLP/TP and IA No.98987/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT) Diary No(s). 24329/2017 () (and  IA  No.98625/2017-PERMISSION  TO  FILE  SLP/TP  and  IA

9

No.98630/2017-CONDONATION  OF  DELAY  IN  FILING  and  IA No.98633/2017-CONDONATION  OF  DELAY  IN  REFILING  and  IA No.98636/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.98640/2017-impleading party)  Diary No(s). 29100/2017 () (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.95513/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.95519/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.95511/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE SLP/TP and IA No.95515/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT)  Diary No(s). 31231/2017 () (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.103098/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.103109/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED  JUDGMENT  and  IA  No.103107/2017-APLICATION  FOR  SEEKING PERMISSION  TO  DELETE  PROFORMA  RESPONDENTS  and  IA No.103097/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE SLP/TP )  SLP(C) No. 28006/2017 (XVI) (IA  No.100020/2017-CONDONATION  OF  DELAY  IN  FILING  and  IA No.100024/2017-EXEMPTION  FROM  FILING  O.T.  and  IA No.100018/2017-PERMISSION  TO  FILE  SLP/TP   and  IA No.100029/2017-DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT)   Date : 31-10-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH          HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI Counsel for the  parties Mr. Rajnish Kumar Jha, Adv.  

Mr. Dhanmohan Mishra, Adv.  Mr. Srikant Dubey, Adv.  Mr. Mahendra Kumar, Adv.  Dr. Monika Gusain, Adv.  Mr. Abhinash Jain, Adv.  Mr. N. N. Jha, Adv.  Mr. Anilendra Pandey, Adv.  Dr. M. S. Verma, Adv.  Mr. Mahendra Kumar, Adv.  Ms. Divya Mishra, Adv.  Mr. Shrikant Dubey, Adv.  Ms. Poonam Seth, Adv.  Ms. Ranjana Vohra, Adv.  Ms. Shashi Singh, Adv.  Mr. Deepak Goel, Adv.  Mr. Avinash Sharma, Adv Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv.  Mr. Karunakar Mahalik, Adv.

10

Mr. E. C. Vidya Sagar, Adv.  Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.  Mr. Jitendra Kumar, Adv.  Mr. Alok Kumar, Adv.  Mr. Pardeep Gupta, Adv.  Mr. Parinav Gupta, Adv.  Ms. Mansi Gupta, Adv.  Mr. Moazzam Ali, Adv.  Dr. (Mrs) Vipin Gupta, Adv.  Mr. Bipin Kumar, Adv.  Mr. M. K. Chaudhary, Adv.  Mr. Prabhakar Thakur, Adv.  Mr. Ajay Kumar Talesara, AOR Mr. Chandan Kumar Mandal, Adv.  Ms. Fauzia Shakil, Adv.  Mr. Ujjwal Singh, Adv.  Mr. Mojahid Karim Khan, Adv.  Mr. Tarun Thakur, Adv.  Mr. Gopal Jha, Adv.  Mr. Chandan K. Jha, Adv.  

                   Mr. Abhijat P. Medh, AOR Mr. Yadav Narender Singh, AOR

    Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, AOR Ms. Bihu Sharma, Adv.  Ms. Purnima Krishna, Adv.  

                        UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following                              O R D E R

Leave granted.  The  civil  appeals  are  disposed  of  in  terms  of  the  signed

non-reportable Judgment.   Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA)                              (RENU DIWAN)    COURT MASTER                                ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)