The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI 8. W.P. (S) No. 814 of 2023 1. Nitin Oraon, aged about 34 years, S/o Sadhu Oraon, Resident of Plot No.D/1936/37, Near C.R.P.F. Colony, Harmu Housing Colony, Harmu, Ranchi, P.O.- Harmu, P.S.- Argora, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 2. Nibedita Kumari, aged about 36 years, D/o Anup Kumar Chatterjee, Resident of Kumhar Toli, Chuna Bhatta, Near Gopala Mandir, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- Sukhdeo Nagar, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 3. Asha Kumari, aged about 40 years, D/o Sri Kali Thakur, Resident of Qrs. No.25/3, University Colony, P.O.- Bariatu Road, P.S.- Bariatu, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 4. Sunil Kumar Sriwastava, aged about 26 years, S/o Dadan Lal, Resident of Swarnrekha Institute, Rishav Tower, Line Tank Road, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 5. Rajendra Bhagat, aged about 29 years, S/o Shiv Narayan Bhagat, Resident of Village & Post- Puriyo, P.S.- Chanho, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 6. Amit Bhagat, aged about 33 years, S/o Somra Oraon, Resident of Bajotoli, P.O.- Sons, P.S.- Chanho, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 7. Annu Kumari, aged about 36 years, D/o Ashok Kumar Singh, Resident of Near West End Park, Kaju Bagan, Surya Colony, P.O.- Hehal, P.S.- Sukhdeo Nagar, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) Imran Ansari, aged about 28 years, S/o Alam Ansari, Resident of Village- Jainagar, P.O. & P.S.- Patratu, District- Ramgarh (Jharkhand) 9. Lalita Orain, aged about 41 years, D/o Mahadeo Oraon, Resident of Misir Gonda, Pipartoli, P.O.- Jawahar Nagar, P.S.- Gonda, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 10. Shanti Tigga, aged about 27 years, D/o Panchu Tigga, Resident of Village- Darkandriya, P.O.- Paharkandriya, P.S.- Bero, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 11. Niraj Kumar, aged about 25 years, S/o Muneshwar Ram, Resident of Vidya Nagar, Road No.03, Near Srinagar Chowk, P.O.- Harmu, P.S.- Sukhdeo Nagar, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 12. Ranjeet Kumar, aged about 38 years, S/o Mahendra Prasad Singh, Resident of Hans Marg, Near Mixture Factory, P.O.- Ranchi University, P.S.- Gonda, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 13. Wakil Ahmad, aged about 29 years, S/o Jyaoul Haq Ansari, Resident of Village- Barhu, P.O.- Kokodoro, P.S.- Pithoria, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 14. Kumar Paras Mani, aged about 32 years, S/o Indrashan Choudhary, Resident of Q.No. DT-2657, Tanki Side, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 15. Angad Manjhi, aged about 33 years, S/o Durga Charan Manjhi, Resident of Village- Phasko, P.O.- Rangamati, P.S.- Arsha, District- Purulia (West Bengal), Presently residing at Kanke Road Dam Side, Jaypur Pul, Shanti Nagr, near Ghora Maidan, P.O. & P.S.- Kanke, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 16. Deepak Kumar Srivastava, aged about 37 years, S/o Madan Prasad Sinha, Resident of Kishoreganj, Road No.8, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- Sukhdeonagar, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 2 17. Nitesh Oraon, aged about 28 years, S/o Sadhu Oraon, Resident of Plot No. D/1936/37, Near C.R.P.F. Colony, Harmu Housing Colony, P.O.- Harmu, P.S.- Argora, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 18. Ranjit Ram, aged about 33 years, S/o Ramblish Ram, Resident of Village- Sukurhuttu, P.O. & P.S.- Kanke, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 19. Indramani Sakarwar, aged about 37 years, S/o Rohitasw Kymar Singh, Resident of Q.No. R-20/3, Harmu Housing Colony, P.O.- Harmu, P.S.- Argora, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 20. Amar Linda, aged about 27 years, S/o Mahadeo Linda, Resident of Misir Gonda, Pipertoli, P.O.- Jawahar Nagar, P.S.- Gonda, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 21. Kamakhya Narayan Singh, aged about 23 years, S/o Sunil Kumar Singh, Resident of Karamtoli, Ahir Toli, Near Dr. S.N. Yadav, P.O.- Morahbadi, P.S.- Lalpur, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) … … Petitioners -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, having its Office at Project Building, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S.- Jagannathpur, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 2. The Secretary, Higher & Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. & P.S.- Doranda, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. The Director, Higher & Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. & P.S.- Doranda, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand Jharkhand Academic Council through its Secretary, having its Office at Namkum, P.O. & P.S.- Namkum, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 5. The Ranchi University, through the Registrar, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- 4. Kotwali, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) 6. The S.S. Memorial College, Ranchi, through its Principal/ Prof- in-charge, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Ranchi … … Respondents (Jharkhand) --- CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY For the Petitioners ---
Legal Reasoning
before this Court in W.P. (S) No. 3978 of 2022, but this Court refused to entertain the writ petition at the instance of the association and observed that regularization of service is a personal cause of action which cannot be espoused by any association and there is no concept of public interest litigation in service law and held that the writ petition on behalf of the Association is not maintainable. He
Arguments
: Mr. Niladri S. Mukherjee, Advocate Mr. Shravan Kumar, Advocate Ms. Sandhya Singh, Advocate For Ranchi University : Mr. Anoop Kr. Mehta, Advocate For the Resp.-JAC For the Resp-State Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate : Ms. Richa Sanchita, Advocate Mr. Radha Kishan Gupta, Advocate : Mr. Aditya Raman, A.C. to G.A. III Mr. Uttam Kr. Das, Advocate Mr. Shashank Saurav, Advocate --- Heard Learned counsel appearing for the parties. 04/11.04.2023 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- “(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders specifically in the nature of Mandamus for a direction upon the 3 respondents to Accommodate and Absorb the services of the petitioners in view of the fact that they have regularly working for more than 7 months to 6 years of continuous service as they are facing danger of Extinction of their Services due to NEW EDUCATION POLICY-2019 of the Central Government, in the process of implementation by the State Government, by which the education of Intermediate Section running in the Degree Colleges has been dropped- substituted by a New Provision of Educational structure and Course from Class IX to XII. Therefore, the petitioners need absorption & accommodation either in their parent existing Degree Colleges or in the new Educational Institutions to impart New Educational Course and sections combining from Class IX to XII. (ii) For direction upon the respondents to immediately frame a scheme of absorption and accommodation of the petitioners services of the above prayer of absorption and accommodation of the petitioners herein para-1(i). (iii) For direction upon the respondents to make and frame necessary Rules and provisions for absorption and accommodation of the petitioners working in Intermediate Section of the S.S. Memorial College, Kanke Road, Ranchi along with details Service conditions before implementing the the Central aforesaid New Education Policy-2019 of Government in the State of Jharkhand. to absorb, (iv) For direction upon the accommodate, protect and continue the services of petitioners also in view of the fact that they are serving in the Colleges as teaching faculties for more than 7 months to 6 years and most of them are overage for other employment, heavy family burden to rear-up and educate their children. (v) For direction upon the concerned respondents to open the EPF account of the petitioners since till date the respondents have not done the same. (vi) For direction upon the respondents not to disengage the services of the petitioners during pendency of the present writ petition. (vii) For any other relief/reliefs the petitioners would be found entitled as per law and equity in the facts and circumstances of the case.” respondents the 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were appointed in the constituent colleges of the respondent university on contractual basis and they have been receiving honorarium. He submitted that the details of the appointment in connection with each of the petitioners have been annexed / mentioned in the writ petition showing that they were appointed through interview by the College Committee of S.S. Memorial College. The details of appointment of the petitioners on contractual basis have been mentioned in Paragraph No.6 of the writ 4 petition which is ranging from 09.11.2016 to 01.04.2022. He submitted that the Petitioners Nos. 1 to 4, 6 to 8, 10 and 12 to 21 are working as 3rd Grade Employee (Non-Teaching Employee) and Petitioner Nos. 5, 9, 11 are working as 4th Grade Employee (Non- Teaching Employee) in S.S. Memorial College, Kanke Road, Ranchi. 4. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioners have been working on contractual basis against sanctioned vacant posts appointed by the College Committee of S.S. Memorial College on the minimum consolidated amount with expectation that their services would be regularized as per the government policy decision and the verdicts of this Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court from time to time. He submitted that most of the petitioners have completed more than 7 months to 6 years of service in the S.S. Memorial College. 5. Learned counsel referred to Annexure-4 of the writ petition and submitted that information was given vide Letter dated 06.03.2019 issued under the Right to Information Act, 2005 that vide Letter dated 13.11.2008, directions were issued by the Higher, Technical Education and Skill Development Department of the State Government to all the constituent colleges that the education at the inter level is to be bifurcated from the education in graduation level. It was followed by letter dated 27.08.2010 issued by the said department of the State Government. Vide Letter dated 24.11.2010 (Annexure-5), the Vice Chancellor of the Ranchi University requested the Principals of the constituent colleges to provide the details of the proposed bifurcation of the teaching and non-teaching staff in their respective colleges. 6. Learned counsel submitted that with the proposed coming into force of the New Education Policy, education till intermediate level is required to be bifurcated and the petitioners have been working on contractual basis. The learned counsel submitted that once the bifurcation of intermediate and graduate level education takes place, the petitioners will be left remediless. The learned counsel submitted that in such circumstances, representations were filed on behalf of the Association of the petitioners namely, Jharkhand Angibhoot Mahavidyalaya Intermediate Anubandh Shikshak Evam Shikshakettar 5 Karmachari Morcha before the various authorities including the Hon’ble Governor. However, no such representation raising the demand of absorption of the petitioners in the concerned college has been filed with the writ petition. The learned counsel submitted that no decision has been taken in the matter and therefore, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners. 7. He also submitted that the association of the petitioners namely, Jharkhand Angibhoot Mahavidyalaya Intermediate Anubandh Shikshak Evam Shikshakettar Karmachari Morcha had earlier moved
Decision
submitted that although the writ petition was dismissed, but this Court had observed that if any individual member has any grievance, liberty is reserved with him to approach the appropriate forum. 8. He submitted that different writ petitions have been filed by different persons who are seeking regularization and/or absorption of their services and as per the prayer made in the writ petition, the petitioners are seeking a mandamus for accommodation and absorption of their services and also seeking a direction upon the respondent to immediately frame a scheme for absorption and accommodation of the services of the petitioners before implementation of the New Education Policy, 2019. 9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- Jharkhand Academic Council (JAC) submitted that though no counter affidavit has been filed in the present writ petition, but counter affidavits have been filed in other cases and the stand of the JAC is similar as that of the other cases. The learned counsel submitted that the JAC is not the appointing authority of the petitioners and so far as JAC is concerned, it is empowered for conducting of examination at the intermediate level and only the approval with regard to appointments is being given by JAC. The learned counsel also 6 submitted that mere approval given by JAC will not confer any right upon the petitioners. The learned counsel further submitted that so far as the grievance of the petitioners regarding accommodation or absorption is concerned, no mandamus can be issued by this Court and it is essentially a matter of policy. He submitted that no such policy has been brought on record by the petitioners, rather the petitioners are seeking a direction upon the respondents to frame a policy in anticipation that they will be out of service once the new education policy is implemented. 10. The learned counsel also submitted that petitioners are admittedly contractual employees working on honorarium basis and no financial aid or financial assistance is provided by JAC to these petitioners. Learned counsel also submitted that the honorarium is disbursed from the fund which the college receives from the students and there is no element of any government aid involved in the present case. 11. The learned counsel appearing for the Ranchi University submitted that the University has nothing to do in the matter. The University is only making provision for the infrastructure of the college and the matter relating to intermediate education is exclusively within the domain of the respondent college and JAC. The learned counsel submitted that the University has nothing to do with the teaching at the intermediate level or with regard to the employment of the petitioners. 12. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted that there is no policy as such with regard to the regularization, accommodation or absorption of the petitioners. He also submitted that so far as the respondent-State is concerned, the regularization policy of the year 2015 framed by the State in terms of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court has nothing to do with the regularization of the petitioners. He also submitted that the petitioners are not government employees. Learned counsel also referred to Annexure-12 of the writ petition which is dated 13.11.2020 and the enclosure thereto to submit that the enclosure refers to regularization policy of the year 2015 which is not applicable to the petitioners. The 7 learned counsel submitted that regularization of services can be done only under a scheme which is essentially a policy matter and no mandamus can be issued as prayed for in this writ petition. He submitted that aforesaid submissions on behalf of the respondent-State have been made on the basis of the materials available on record, although no counter affidavit as such has been filed by the State. 13. In response, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that at times, financial assistance is provided by Jharkhand Academic Council. 14. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds that the petitioners are seeking mandamus from this Court upon the respondents to accommodate and absorb the services of the petitioners who are working on contractual basis in the respondent-S.S. Memorial College and honorarium is being paid for their services. 15. The petitioners are also seeking a direction upon the respondents to immediately frame a scheme of absorption and accommodation of the services of the petitioners and petitioners are under apprehension that they are facing danger of going out of service by virtue of implementation of the New Education Policy, 2019. 16. This Court is neither inclined to issue any mandamus as prayed for issuing a direction upon the respondents to frame a scheme for absorption and accommodation of the services of the petitioners, nor inclined to issue any direction to accommodate, absorb and regularize the services of the petitioners. These matters are essentially matters of policy and accordingly, no mandamus is being issued by this Court with respect to the prayers made in this writ petition. 17. However, if the petitioners are covered by any existing policy of the respondents or if any such policy governing the contractual employment of the petitioners in the respondent college is framed, the petitioners may approach the Secretary, Higher & Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi for consideration of their respective cases in accordance with law. 18. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. 19. Pending I.A., if any, is closed. 20. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 8 Binit (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)