Invalidity of Appointment Based on Forged Documents and Lack of Continuous Service Barring Recognition of Teaching Service

The petitioner was allegedly appointed as an Assistant Teacher (Biology) on January 16, 1985, at Project Girls High School, Garu, which was selected as a "Project School" on March 30, 1985

Following various litigations and the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Bihar v. Project Uchcha Vidhyalaya Shikshak Sangh (2006), a "Three-Man Committee" (Alam Committee) was formed to scrutinize individual claims for service recognition

The Committee rejected the petitioner’s claim, finding his appointment documents suspicious and fabricated, noting two conflicting appointment dates (1985 and 1987) and lack of evidence regarding the school’s functionality after 2006

The petitioner sought quashing of the order dated April 5, 2021, and recognition of service from January 1, 1989

1. Whether the petitioner's appointment was valid and genuine to entitle him to recognition of service and consequential benefits

2. Whether the state's power to appoint teachers through Managing Committees stood ceased at the time of the petitioner's alleged joining

3. Whether the school in question was a functional institution capable of supporting a claim for continuous service

The Court relied on Government Letter No. 131 dated February 20, 1985, which stripped School Managing Committees of the power to appoint teachers in Project High Schools

It applied the principle of void ab initio for appointments made without authority

The court further followed the precedent set in State of Jharkhand v. Bal Mohan Prasad (LPA No. 138 of 2019), which upheld the findings of the Alam Committee regarding "closed schools" and suspicious appointments in Project Schools, emphasizing that service recognition cannot be granted to staff of non-functional or "shell" institutions

The Court found the petitioner’s claim legally untenable due to major factual discrepancies. Firstly, while the petitioner claimed a 1985 appointment, his contribution letter was signed in 1987, creating a two-year gap that suggested the documents were backdated to precede the school's formal recognition

Secondly, since the Managing Committee's power to appoint ceased on February 20, 1985, the petitioner's 1987 joining was unauthorized and void ab initio

Administratively, the Court noted that the school lacked lawful land title, had no student records for board exams since 1986, and was reported by villagers as non-functional since 2006

Consequently, the petitioner failed to prove continuous service, and the Court held that the institution was merely a "shell" operated through fabricated documents

The High Court upheld the State’s order (Memo No. 776) and dismissed the writ application, ruling that the petitioner was not entitled to service recognition or any consequential benefits