In a significant ruling that ends a protracted legal struggle, the Patna High Court has reinstated two women panchayat teachers, setting aside the orders of both district and state-level tribunals. The court has also directed that the teachers be granted all monetary benefits, legally permissible, with effect from October 9, 2014.
A Decade-Long Fight for Justice
The judgment, which became public on a Tuesday evening, was delivered on December 19 by a single bench of Justice Alok Kumar Sinha. The bench allowed a joint writ petition filed by Kumari Bandana and Guriya Kumari, who have been fighting a legal battle concerning their service for approximately ten years.
Their counsel, Advocate Akash Chaturvedi, presented the case that his clients were originally appointed against sanctioned and vacant posts over a decade ago. While a service dispute arose, a district-level appellate tribunal in Buxar initially validated their appointments through an order dated October 9, 2014, and dismissed the dispute.
Illegal Review and Subsequent Appeals
However, in a controversial move, the same tribunal later reviewed its own order, resulting in the removal of the petitioners from their posts on January 25, 2016. Advocate Chaturvedi argued that this action was completely without jurisdiction. He emphasized that the appointment rules for panchayat primary teachers do not confer any power upon such tribunals to review their own orders.
The petitioners then approached the state-level tribunal, challenging their removal. Unfortunately, this appeal was rejected on August 24, 2017, with the tribunal overlooking the alleged illegality of the district tribunal's review.
High Court's Decisive Intervention
The Patna High Court's intervention has finally brought relief to the two teachers. By quashing the orders of the lower tribunals, the court has not only reinstated them but also secured their financial rights. The court's directive for monetary benefits to be calculated from October 9, 2014—the date their appointment was first ratified—ensures they receive compensation for the period of unjust removal.
This judgment underscores the importance of jurisdictional limits of administrative tribunals and serves as a reminder of the judicial recourse available for government employees entangled in prolonged service disputes.
