Biraj Mahato … v. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Department of Human Resources & Development
Case Details
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (S) No. 2078 of 2016 Biraj Mahato …… Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Department of Human Resources & Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The Director, Secondary Education, Department of Human Resources & Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 4. The District Education Officer, Ranchi 5. The Accountant General (A & E II), Jharkhand and Bihar, Ranchi …… Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- ----- For the petitioner For the Resp. State For the Resp. No. 5 : Mr. A. K. Sahani, Advocate : Mr. Rahul Saboo, GP-II : Mr. Sudarshan Srivastava, Advocate ….. ORAL JUDGMET IN COURT 25/20.02.2024 Heard Mr. A. K. Sahani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rahul Saboo, learned GP-II and Mr. Sudarshan
Legal Reasoning
Srivastava, learned counsel for the Accountant General. 2. This writ petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner to regularize the service of the petitioner in light of the order dated 13.02.2015 passed in Contempt Case (Civil) No. 116 of 2009 and for making payment of up-to-date remuneration of the petitioner in the appropriate scale of pay with consequential benefits and for other ancillary reliefs. 3. It is submitted that the services of the petitioner was directed to be regularized vide order dated 14.07.2008 passed in W. P. (S) No. 222 of 2003 by the High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi with all consequential benefits. Thereafter, the State had preferred LPA No. 183 of 2009, which was dismissed on 19.03.2010 by the Division Bench of this Court. Thereafter the State had preferred SLP (Civil) No. 5687 of 2012 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which was also dismissed vide order dated 11.05.2012 by the 2 Hon’ble Supreme Court. Consequently, the Principal Secretary, vide order dated 17.07.2014 (i.e. Annexure II) after setting aside the order of the Director dated 11.07.2002 and had directed the Director (Secondary Education), Jharkhand to ensure the compliance of the order dated 14.07.2008 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand with all the consequential benefits, Vide- Annexure-11. The order dated 17.07.2014 was passed by the Principal Secretary, Human Resources and Development Department was further modified vide corrigendum dated 31.07.2014 by which it has been clarified that due to typographical error the order dated ‘14.02.2012’ has been typed in place of ‘14.02.2000’ and as such, it should be read as ‘14.02.2000’ in place of ‘14.02.2012’ in the order dated 31.07.2014. However, the Director (Secondary Education) had directed the District Education Officer, Ranchi for making payment of Rs. 8,67,496/- only to the petitioner for the period 15.02.1992 to 25.09.2002, which also appears from the counter affidavit dated 22.11.2016. However, remaining amount was not paid to the petitioner and as such, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition. 4. It is further submitted that the State has filed counter affidavit and has taken the stand that payment cannot be made to the petitioner as he was absent for the period 2002 to 2016 and salary of previous period have also not been made. Hence, the petitioner cannot be allowed to suffer for the laches on the part of Department and as such, he is entitled to all the consequential benefits and arrears of salary. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that the instant writ petition is devoid of merit. It is submitted that the petitioner has already been regularized. However, payment of salary for the period 2002 to 2016 cannot be made as he was found absent and he was not 3 marking the attendance, which is evident from the enquiry conducted in light of orders passed by this Court on 09.05.2018 and 20.06.2018 and a report was submitted by the Regional Director vide Annexure- R/A, R/B and R/I respectively. The Regional Director (Education), South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi, who has stated that after 26.09.2002, the School has no information about the presence of the petitioner. It is submitted that the Respondent is not liable to make any payment to the petitioner as he was found absent. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 has submitted that he is a formal party and the respondent no. 5 has to say nothing on the merits of the case. 7. 8. This case has got chequered history. It transpires that the petitioner was appointed on 31.08.1984 vide Annexure-3 and he was dismissed from service by the order dated 09.02.1995 and which was challenged by the petitioner by filing CWJC No. 1086 of 1995 (R) for regularization and payment of salary including arrears of salary. 9. Thus Ranchi Bench of Patna High Court had disposed of the said writ application i.e. CWJC No. 1086 of 1995 (R) of the petitioner with a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner with regard to payment of salary. 10 Thereafter, the petitioner had filed another writ petition bearing CWJC No. 1800 of 1997 (R) for regularization and payment of salary which was disposed of on 27.07.1998 by the Ranchi Bench of Patna High Court with direction to consider the case of the petitioner afresh and in case the petitioner has been found to be appointed by the Managing Committee of School and still working as a Science Teacher, then he may be appointed and regularized against the post on which his appointment was made. 11. However, the respondent-authority again vide order dated 4 09.07.2002 held that the appointment of the petitioner is not made against the vacant post and hence, he could not be regularized and as such, he was removed from the service earlier. 12. Thereafter vide order dated 14.07.2008 passed W.P.(S) No. 222 of 2003, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had allowed the writ petition filed by the petitioner by quashing order dated 11.07.2002 and had directed the respondent to regularize the services of the petitioner against the existing vacancy of a sanctioned post of a Science Teacher within a period of two months from the date filing of the representation with all consequential benefits in accordance with law. 13. Thereafter the respondents had preferred LPA No. 183 of 2009 before this Court, which was dismissed on 19.03.2010 by the Division Bench of this Court. 14. Thereafter the respondents-State had preferred SLP (Civil) No. 5687 of 2012 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which was also dismissed vide order dated 11.05.2012 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 15. Thus, it is evident that the order dated 14.07.2008 passed in W.P. (S) No. 222 of 2003 attained its finality. 16. However, when the grievance of the petitioner has not been redressed, then he was compelled to file one Contempt Case (Civil) No. 116 of 2009. 17. It reveals from the order dated 09.05.2014 passed in Contempt Case (Civil) No. 116 of 2009 by the then Hon’ble the Chief Justice that counsel for the opposite parties had requested for six weeks’ time for complying with the order dated 09.05.2014 as contained in Annexure-10. 18. Thereafter, it transpires vide order dated 17.07.2014, the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand had directed the authorities to 5 implement the order dated 14.07.2008 passed in W. P. (S) No. 222 of 2003, which was affirmed in LPA No. 183 of 2009 before the Division Bench of this Court and in SLP (Civil) No. 5687 of 2012 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court as the order dated 11.07.2002 passed by the then Secretary, Primary and Adult Education, Human Resource Department had already been quashed in light of the order dated 14.07.2008 passed in W. P. (S) No. 222 of 2003 and had directed the Director, Secondary Education, to ensure to give all consequential benefits to the petitioner vide order dated 17.07.2014, Annexure-11. 19. However, the order dated 17.07.2014, (Annexure-11) was modified by the corrigendum dated 31.07.2014, (Annexure-11/1) by which it has been clarified that due to typographical error the order dated 14.02.2012 has been typed in place of 14.02.2000 and as such, it should be read as ‘14.02.2000’ in place of ‘14.02.2012’ in the order dated 31.07.2014. 20. Thus, it is evident that even the Principal Secretary of the Human Resources Department had complied with the direction passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 21. However, the Director, Secondary Education vide order dated 13.08.2014 has passed an order for payment of Rs. 8,67,496/- only. 22. Although the petitioner has filed representations on 10.12.2014 vide Annexure- 14 and on 06.04.2015, (Annexure-15) that he has been paid amount only by part compliance of the order dated 14.07.2008 by making payment for the period of 15.02.1992 to 25.09.2002, but his services has not been regularized. 23. It transpires that vide Annexure-12 i.e. order dated 13.08.2014, the Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources and Development Department has mainly directed to make payment of arrears of salary to the petitioner of Rs. 8,67,496/- and 6 has not issued any consequential order for regularization of the petitioner with all consequential benefits. Even the Director appears to be silent on the point of arrears of salary and has disobeyed the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Although, the another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated on 09.05.2018 and 20.06.2018 had directed the respondents to ascertain the case of the petitioner. Thereafter, respondents by filing specific counter affidavit on 27.04.2022 has come with the plea vide Annexure-R/I by stating that the petitioner was found absent since 26.09.2002. 24. This Court is surprised looking to the report and the Specific Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State as this appears to be contemptuous also as the respondents are deliberately time and again violating the order of this Court and they are denying the benefits of fruits of the order of this Court to the petitioner by taking the different pleas on different occasions. 25. As this Court is of the view to decide the case on the merit and hence, this Court is not calling for the personal appearance of the Authorities, otherwise, this is a fit case in which the Authorities could have been hauled up for filing such a misleading and wrong counter affidavit. 26. On the one hand, it is evident from the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 14.07.2008 in W. P. (S) No. 222 of 2003 that services of the petitioner has been directed to be regularized with all consequential benefits and also the then Director/ Principal Secretory, Secondary Education, Human Resources Development Department had vide his order dated 14.02.2000 observed that the petitioner is working in the School since the year 1992 and he has been appointed validly by the Managing Committee of Project High School, Jonha and the said petitioner is said to be working in the school since 1992 till his 7 superannuation, but the Director, Secondary Education, Department of Human Resources & Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi sat over the order of the High Court which is not appreciated by this Court. 27. Under the circumstances, the respondents are directed to regularize the services of the petitioner forthwith in light of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.07.2008 in W. P. (S) No. 222 of 2003 and in light of the order dated 13.02.2015 passed in Contempt Case (Civil) No. 116 of 2009 and to pay the entire arrears of salary and all consequential benefits to the petitioner in accordance with law, which is found due to the petitioner within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the Court may take serious view. The Respondent No. 5 is also directed to issue consequential directions. 28. Thus, this Writ Petition No. 2078 of 2016 is allowed. Kamlesh/ (Sanjay Prasad, J.)