1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.3885 of 2019 ------ Sulendra Kumar Sahu, son of Shri Ranthu Sahu, resident of At Saipur Galu Toil, P.O. Khijri, P.S. Simdega, District Simdega, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, through its Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Principal Secretary, Department of School Education & Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. Director, Primary Education, Department of School Education & Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 4. Deputy Director, Primary Education, Department of School Education & Literacy, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 5. Deputy Commissioner, Simdega, Jharkhand. 6. District Superintendent of Education, Simdega, Jharkhand. … … Respondents ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Binod Singh, Advocate Mr. Jayati Toppo, Advocate For the Respondent(s): Ms. Rishi Bharati, AC to AAG-III ------ 04/ 17.03.2025 By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:- i. For quashing of Memo No.-918, Dated 15.07.2019, issued by the Respondent No.-6, District Superintendent of Education, Simdega, whereby and whereunder the charge sheet, Prapatra- ‘Ka’ has been issued against the petitioner, since, the same kind of show cause notice issued vide letter No.- 1274, dated 08.08.2016 and assigning the same reason, the petitioner was terminated from the post of Intermediate Trained Teacher, vide Office Order issued by Respondent No.-6, vide Memo No.- 1682, Dated-04.10.2016, which was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.(S) No.-7142 of 2016, before this Hon’ble Court and the Hon’ble Court was pleased to quash the Order dated 04.10.2016, and it has been held by the Hon’ble 2 Court that the petitioner is entitle to reinstatement in service with all consequential benefits. ii. For staying the further proceeding in pursuance to the Memo No.-918, Dated 15.07.2019, issued by the Respondent No.-6, District Superintendent of Education, Simdega, or during the pendency of the writ petition the operation of the order contained in the Memo No.-918, Dated 15.07.2019, may kindly be stayed. iii. For issuance of an appropriate Writ(s), Direction(s), Order(s) commanding upon the respondents concern not to harass, torture and defame again and again without any valid reason.” 2. The petitioner was selected in the meeting of Village Education Committee held on 13.06.2007 and was appointed as Para-Teacher vide appointment letter dated 14.06.2007. He joined on 15.06.2007 in the Upgraded Primary School, Saipur, Simdega. Thereafter, on 11.08.2007, the petitioner applied before the said Committee for grant of permission to pursue higher education i.e. graduation, and the Aam Sabha Committee vide its meeting held on 18.08.2007, has accepted the request of the petitioner for the same. 3. The petitioner accordingly partakes in the examination of Graduation after following the proper channel. Thereafter, certificate of Graduation was issued to the petitioner by the Ranchi University. 4. During course of scrutiny of educational qualification of the petitioner, it was found that he has acquired his degree from Simdega College, Simdega in the Academic Session 2006-09 as a regular student. Consequently, a show-cause was issued to the petitioner on 08.08.2016. 5. The petitioner in his show cause reply vehemently and 3 fervently conceded that he had appeared in the final examination for Bachelor of Arts with permission of the Village Education Committee, however, the District Education Establishment Committee, Simdega, observed that the petitioner was not granted permission for enhancing his educational qualification pursuant whereof his service was terminated by the District Superintendent of Education, Simdega. The petitioner being discontented with the aforesaid order of termination, moved before this Court vide W.P.(S) No.7142 of 2016, wherein this Court vide order dated 25.08.2018 allowed the writ petition directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner and accept his joining. 6. Subsequently, after the petitioner was reinstated and was discharging his duties to the satisfaction of all concerned, the respondents issued charge-sheet against the petitioner as contained in Memo No.918/ Simdega, dated 15.07.2019, (Annexure-23 to the writ petition). The allegations levelled against the petitioner in the charge-sheet are that he obtained his graduation degree in an irregular manner, and he acted in violation of the Government Servant Conduct Rules. In the said charge-sheet the petitioner was put to show cause as to why his graduation degree be not declared as illegal and a departmental proceeding be not initiated against him for violation of Government Servant Conduct Rules. 7. Thus, the petitioner is now before this Court calling in question the impugned order as contained in Memo No.918/ Simdega, dated 15.07.2019, (Annexure-23 to the writ petition). 4 8. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the charge-sheet filed against the petitioner is bad in law and with an oblique motive as the allegation levelled against him with regard to enhancement of his qualification has already been taken note of and has been set at rest by this Court vide order dated 25.08.2018 passed in W.P.(S) No.7142 of 2016, holding therein that there is no allegation that the petitioner has submitted a forged certificate or that the educational qualification acquired by him is not valid. It has been further held that evidently, none of the conditions which may warrant termination from service during the period of probation is satisfied in the case of the petitioner. This Court finally observed that the procedure adopted by the respondent-Authority which has concluded with order of termination of the petitioner from service must be held erroneous. 9. Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondents submits that the petitioner has illegally used his educational certificates to get the benefit of higher education and he is liable to be charge-sheeted. 10. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondents, at length and perused the material available on record. 11. The petitioner beseeches the attention of this Court towards the proceeding of the Village Education Committee, held on 18.08.2007, which reveals that the petitioner was granted permission to appear in the graduation examination and he appeared in the said examination with permission of the Village Education 5 Committee. 12. The show-cause notice dated 08.08.2016 issued to the petitioner also fails to establish breach of condition on part of the petitioner, which would suggest his guilt. Degree of graduation awarded to him is a valid degree and admittedly is not a forged one. 13. There is no gainsaying the fact that as this petitioner has been selected as a Teacher on his own merit, if some irregularity was done while he was working as a Para teacher, that will have no effect on the present appointment which is absolutely different from the earlier one and is a fresh appointment. Admittedly, when working as a Para Teacher, the respondents have not taken any steps against the petitioner, they cannot take action now when the petitioner has been appointed afresh, and there is no illegality in the fresh appointment. Thus, this Court holds that the respondents have arbitrarily issued charge-sheet against him. 14. As an upshot of discussion foregoing, the impugned Memo No.918/ Simdega, dated 15.07.2019, (Annexure-23 to the writ petition), is quashed and set aside. 15. Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. No order as to costs. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant.Cp-2