The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Letters Patent Appellate Jurisdiction) LPA No. 333 of 2021 ----- VTP Bharti Vocational Training Centre, registered under Skill Development Initiative Scheme, Ministry of Labour and Training, Government of India, Registration No.420050004 having registered address at Tilaiya, PO & PS Tilaiya District Koderma through its one of its Director, Binay Kumar Mehta, resident of village- Alonja Khurd, PO & PS Ichak, District- Hazaribag. ... Petitioner/ Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Department of Labour, Employment and Training, State of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, PO & PS Doranda, District- Ranchi. 3. The Director, Department of Employment and Training cum Member Secretary, Jharkhand Society for skill development initiative skills Ranchi, having its office at Nepal House, PO & PS Doranda, District- Ranchi. 4. The Assistant Director, Department of Employment and Training cum Treasurer, Jharkhand Society for skill Development initiative skills Ranchi, having its office at Nepal House, PO & PS Doranda, District- Ranchi. 5. The Directorate General of Employment and Training, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship, Government of India, Sharam Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, PO Sansad Marg, PS Barakhamba Road, District- New Delhi. 6. The Regional Director, Apprentice and Training, MSO Building, E-Wing 1st Floor DF Block, Sector-1, PO- Salt Lake, PS- Bidhan Nagar, District- Kolkata, West Bengal. … Respondents/Respondents With ----- LPA No. 246 of 2021 VTP G.M. Inter College ... Petitioner/ Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand & others … Respondents/Respondents With LPA No. 250 of 2021 ----- VTP Gyan Jyoti Memorial College, Hazaribag ... Petitioner/ Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand & others … Respondents/Respondents With LPA No. 330 of 2021 ----- VTP G.M.I.T.I Sindur, Hazaribag ... Petitioner/ Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand & others … Respondents/Respondents With LPA No. 42 of 2022 ----- VTP Women Development Centre, Chatra ... Petitioner/ Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand & others … Respondents/Respondents With 2 LPA No. 333 of 2021 ----- LPA No. 43 of 2022 Navi Skill Development Academy, Chatra ... Petitioner/ Appellant Versus
Legal Reasoning
The State of Jharkhand & others … Respondents/Respondents ------ CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA : Mr. Manoj Kumar Choubey, Advocate ----- For the Appellant(s) (In all cases) For the State Mr. Faisal Allam, AC to SC (Mines)-III (In LPA No.43 of 2022) : Mr. Devesh Krishna, SC (Mines)-III (In LPA No.42 of 2022) Mr. Aditya Raman, AC to GA-III Mr. Shivam Anand Pathak, AC to SC-III (In LPA No.330 of 2021) Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, SC-IV Mr. Suman Marandi, AC to SC-IV (In LPA No.333 of 2021) Mr. Amit Kumar, SC (Mines)-II (In LPA No.246 of 2021 & LPA No.250 of 2021) For the UOI : Mr. Madan Prasad, CGC (In LPA No.330 of 2021) Mr. Devanand Kumar, CGC (In LPA No.246 of 2021 & LPA No.250 of 2021) -----
Decision
O R D E R 7th February 2023 Per, Shree Chandrashekhar, J. IA No.4721 of 2021 in LPA No.246 of 2021; IA No.4720 of 2021 in LPA No.250 of 2021; IA No.6718 of 2021 in LPA No.330 of 2021 These interlocutory applications have been filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 58 to 83 days in filing the LPA Nos. 246, 250 and 330 of 2021 respectively. 2. There is no opposition by the respondent(s) of these Letters Patent Appeals to the applications for condonation of delay. 3. Moreover, we are satisfied with the grounds taken in these interlocutory applications to show sufficient cause in delay in filing the LPA Nos.246, 250 and 330 of 2021. 4. IA No.4721 of 2021, IA No.4720 of 2021, and IA No.6718 of 2021 are allowed. 3 LPA No. 333 of 2021 LPA No. 333 of 2021, LPA No. 246 of 2021, LPA No. 250 of 2021, LPA No. 330 of 2021, LPA No. 42 of 2022 & LPA No. 43 of 2022 5. By a common order dated 17th December 2019, a batch of writ petitions filed by the Vocational Training Programme Centres/ Colleges ( in short 'VTPs') seeking a direction for payment to them has been disposed of. 6. On the basis of the order dated 17th December 2019 passed in the aforesaid batch of writ petitions, WPC No. 2163 of 2018 which was filed for a similar relief has also been disposed of by the writ Court. 7. For the sake of convenience, we would indicate that WPC No. 2107 of 2018 corresponds to LPA No. 246 of 2021; WPC No. 2193 of 2018 corresponds to LPA No. 250 of 2021; WPC No. 2112 of 2018 corresponds to LPA No. 330 of 2021; WPC No. 2162 of 2018 corresponds to LPA No. 42 of 2022, and; WPC No. 2161 of 2018 corresponds to LPA No. 43 of 2022. 8. The aforesaid Letters Patent Appeals along with LPA No. 333 of 2021 lay a challenge to the orders passed by the writ Court on the ground that the writ Court was bound by the orders passed in other similar writ petitions and should have followed the orders in WPC No. 181 of 2018 and WPC No. 1672 of 2019. This is the contention of the appellants that the writ Court while accepting a specious plea taken by the State of Jharkhand that the matter is under investigation in Pithoria PS Case No. 72 of 2015 and Doranda PS Case No. 91 of 2016 has declined relief to them. 9. The learned counsels appearing for the State of Jharkhand have taken a preliminary objection on the ground that the orders passed by the writ Court which are under challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeals are consent orders against which no appeal shall lie. 10. It is further submitted that against the money claim a writ petition shall not lie and, therefore, no interference is required in the present matters. 11. In our opinion, it is not that the writ Court has ignored the aforesaid orders passed in WPC No. 181 of 2018 and WPC No. 1672 of 2019 rather the writ Court has recorded a finding that lodging of the First Information Report was not brought to the notice of the co-ordinate Bench 4 LPA No. 333 of 2021 while the aforesaid directions were issued vide orders dated 11th January 2019 and 31st July 2019. 12. In WPC No.181 of 2018, by an order dated 11th January 2019 the writ Court has issued the following directions: “4. The concerned respondent shall take decision in accordance with law within a reasonable period preferably within eight weeks’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. Needless to say, if the claims of the petitioner is found to be genuine, the same shall be disbursed in his favour within three weeks’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order. However, in case of dispute over the claim of the petitioner the same shall be communicated to the petitioner by passing an speaking order within the period aforesaid.” 13. A similar direction has been issued by the writ Court in WPC No.1672 of 2019 by an order dated 31st July 2019. 14. The writ Court has observed as under: “Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the statements made in the supplementary counter affidavit dated 16.12.2019 that the matter with regard to different VTPs including the petitioners is under enquiry before the Anti-Corruption Bureau, no order for consideration of the petitioners’ claim presented before the respondents can be passed at this stage. It appears that the pendency of the enquiry before the Anti- Corruption Bureau and lodging of the FIRs against some of the VTPs were not brought to the notice of the co-ordinate Bench while passing the orders dated 11.01.2019 and 31.07.2019 in the aforesaid writ petitions. However, it is expected that the respondent No.2 shall sincerely pursue the matter before the Anti- Corruption 5 Bureau, Jharkhand so that the pending enquiry in relation to the VTPs is concluded without any undue delay. The present writ petitions are accordingly disposed of.” 15. Except in cases where it is pleaded that fraud has been played upon the aggrieved party against a consent order no appeal lies. In these Letters Patent Appeals there is no such plea raised by the appellant(s). It is also true that if a new fact is discovered which may have a bearing on the final outcome of the lis between the parties the previous order shall not be binding on the Court. In any event, against an order of this nature which has been passed in WPC Nos. 181 of 2018 and 1672 of 2019, others who may be similarly situated cannot as a matter of right seek a similar direction. In the order dated 17th December 2019 passed in the batch of writ petitions, the writ Court has issued a kind of direction to the Secretary, Department of Labour, Employment and Training, Government of Jharkhand to pursue the matters with the Anti Corruption Bureau, Jharkhand so that the inquiry in relation to the VTPs is concluded without any undue delay. 5 LPA No. 333 of 2021 16. Though, Mr. Manoj Kumar Choubey, the learned counsel for the appellants has stated that now the inquiry by the Anti Corruption Bureau has been concluded and any involvement of the appellant(s) has not been found by the Anti Corruption Bureau, having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances in the case, we find no merit in these Letters Patent Appeals and, accordingly, these Letters Patent Appeals are dismissed. (Shree Chandrashekhar, J.) (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.) Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated-7th February 2023 Sharda/S.B.-NAFR