The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ( Letters Patent Appellate Jurisdiction) LPA No. 167 of 2019 1 Ramgati Singh, aged about 47 years, son of Deni Singh. 2. Anil Kumar Singh, aged about 48 years, son of Ishwar Dayal Singh. 3. Aneshwar Singh, aged about 46 years, son of Rajdeo Singh. 4. Bifan Singh, aged about 43 years, son of Deni Singh. 5. Sarju Singh, aged about 48 years, son of Ramjanam Singh. 6. Babuni Singh, aged about 44 years, son of Kariman Singh. Sl. Nos. 1 to 6, resident of Village-Duba, P.O.-Chando, P.S.- Chainpur,District-Palamu. 7. Deonarayan Gupta, aged about 46 years, son of Prithvi Sao, resident of Village + P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District- Palamu. 8. Raju Kumar, aged about 46 years, son of Tapsi Paswan, resident of Village + P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 9. Sushila Devi, aged about 47 years, wife of Ramlal Singh, resident of Village + P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 10. Urmila Gupta, aged about 44 years, wife of Deo Narayan Gupta, resident of Village + P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District- Palamau. 11. Nandkishore Thakur, aged about 49 years, son of late Jagdeo Thakur, resident of Village-Dokra, P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 12. Anant Kumar Ram, aged about 45 years, son of Gokhul Ram, resident of Village-Dokra, P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District- Palamu. 13. Rajendra Prajapati, aged about 43 years, son of late Pahal Prajapati, r/o Village-Basariya Khurd, P.O.-Chando,P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 14. Niranjan Mochi, aged about 49 years, son of Ram Belash Mochi, resident of Village-Basariya, P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 15. Chandrika Singh, aged about 47 years, son of Dwarika Singh. 16. Mahendra Singh, aged about 46 years, son of Nand Kishore Singh. Sl. Nos. 15 & 16, both resident of Village-Duba, P.O.- Chando P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 17. Suresh Singh, aged about 46 years, son of Amardayal Singh, resident of Village + P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District- Palamau. 18. Nandlal Singh, aged about 51 years, son of Bishwas Singh, resident of Village-Alagdiha, P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District- Palamau. 19. Birendra Prajapati, aged about 48 years, son of Nand Kishore Prajapati, resident of Village-Bhangdiha, P.O.-Chando, P.S.- … Appellants Chainpur, District-Palamau. Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development 2 L.P.A No. 167 of 2019 Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi, P.O.-Dhurwa, P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi. 3. Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O.-Dhurwa, P.S.-Jagarnathpur, District-Ranchi 4. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi, P.O. and P.S.- Dhurwa, District-Ranchi. 5. The Director, Mass Education, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi, P.O. and P.S.-Dhurwa, District- Ranchi. 6. Deoki Singh, aged about 56 years, son of Ramdas Singh, resident of Village-Sokra, P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District Palamu. 7. Istaque Ahmad, aged about 56 years, son of Kasim Mian, resident of Village + P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 8. Bishundeo Singh, aged about 45 years, son of late Bhagirathi Singh, resident of Village-Alagdiha, P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 9. Dharmendra Kumar Upadhyay, aged about 40 years, son of Sarju Upadhyay. 10. Triveni Thakur, aged about 49 years, son of Arjun Thakur. 11. Anita Devi, aged about 53 years, wife of Ganga Thakur. Sl. Nos. 9 to 11, resident of Village-Dokra, P.O.-Chando, PS- Chainpur, District-Palamu 12. Nandlal Sao, aged about 50 years, son of Bhuvneshwar Sao, resident of Village-Besariya Kalan, P.O-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu, 13. Suryadeo Singh, aged about 49 years, son of Harifa Singh, resident of Village Basariya, P.O-Chando, P.S-Chainpur, District- Palamu. 14. Bigan Singh, aged about 52 years, son of Basudeo Singh, resident of Village-Basariya, P.O.-Chando, PS-Chainpur, District- Palamu, 15. Ramjit Sahu, aged about 52 years, son of Mohan Sahu, resident of Village-Awsane, P.O.-Chando, PS-Chainpur, District- Palamu, 16. Balkeshwar Sahu, aged about 44 years, son of Ram Saran Sahu, resident of Village-Awsane, P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 17. Ful Kumari, aged about 46 years, daughter of Rajnath Pathak, resident of Village+P.O.-Kot, P.S.-Lesliganj, District-Palamu. 18. Brijdeo Singh, aged about 59 years, son of Raghu Singh. 19. Jaikrishna Singh, aged about 49 years, son of Jhaman Singh. Sl. Nos. 18 & 19, resident of Village + P.O.-Chando, P.S.- Chainpur, District-Palamau. 20. Narendra Choubey, aged about 53 years, son of Alakhdeo 3 L.P.A No. 167 of 2019 Choubey, resident of Village-Dakra, P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 21. Nand Kishore Singh, son of Chulhan Singh, r/o village- Basariya, P.O.-Chando, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamu. 22. Suryadeo Prajapati, son of Tapeshwar Prajapati, r/o village- Chando, District-Palamu. P.S.-Chainpur, P.O.-Chando, ... Respondents
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA For the Appellants For the Respondent-State : Mr. Gaurav Raj, AC to AAG-II : Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate ---------
Decision
O R D E R 14th June 2023 Per, Shree Chandrashekhar, J. I.A No. 4057 of 2019 This interlocutory application has been filed seeking condonation of delay 38 days in filing this present Letters Patent Appeal. The State has raised no objection. For the reasons stated in this application the delay of 38 days in filing this Letters Patent Appeal is condoned and, accordingly, I.A No. 4057 of 2019 is allowed. L.P.A No. 167 of 2019 Nineteen persons who were the petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 835 of 2015 have preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal to challenge the order dated 12th December 2018 by which the writ petition filed by them and others vide W.P.(S) No. 835 of 2015 and W.P.(S) No. 5248 of 2015 have been dismissed. 2. The aforesaid writ petitions were filed by the appellants and others for their absorption in service under the State of Jharkhand. 3. At the outset, we may indicate that the prayer for absorption of the appellants and others was founded on the order dated 21st April 2011 passed in C.W.J.C No. 8418 of 2010 by the Patna High Court and order dated 24th July 2007 issued by the Government of Jharkhand for absorption of some of the employees 4 L.P.A No. 167 of 2019 of the Non-Formal Education scheme. The appellants have also placed reliance on the order passed by the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C No.21391 of 2011. 4. Briefly stated, the appellants were appointed on the post of Instructor/Supervisor under the Non-Formal Education scheme around 1981-82. This may be of some relevance to indicate here that the Non-Formal Education scheme was sponsored by the Government of India w.e.f 2nd October 1978 on the birth anniversary of the father of the nation with an object to provide literacy to the illiterate persons. This is not in dispute that the scheme was closed and by issuing a public notice dated 21st May 2001 engagement of all the persons who were appointed pursuant to the aforesaid scheme sponsored by the Government of India was terminated. The litigation since then has spread over about two decades and several writ petitions were filed by the aggrieved persons. The writ Court has referred to an order passed in W.P.(S) No. 7867 of 2012 in which nine persons had also sought a similar direction for their absorption in service. 5. W.P.(S) No. 7867 of 2012 was filed for a similar direction for absorption in service and the prayer made therein was based on the order passed by the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C Nos. 8110/2001 and 8418/2010. 6. In W.P.(S) No. 7867 of 2012, the prayer made therein has been adjudicated in the following manner: “5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners though were appointed on honorarium basis, suddenly in the year, 2001 the Scheme was closed and the petitioners were rendered jobless. A learned Single Judge of this Court in W. P. (S) No. 658 of 2009 dated 22.08.2012 [“Anaupcharik Shiksha Prashikshit Anudeshak Sangh Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.”], has observed that, 'the authorities may take sympathetic view so that the petitioners may not be left to starve'. He has further submitted that a Letters Patent Appeal being L.P.A. No. 1489 of 2011 is still pending before the Hon'ble Patna High Court and the outcome of the said case would have a bearing on this case. 6. On perusal of the documents on record, I find that the petitioners have themselves stated that they were employed under a Scheme. In the year, 2001 the said Scheme was closed. 7. In view of the aforesaid, I find no merit in the claim of the petitioners. A perusal of order dated 22.08.2012 would indicate that no decision on merit was given by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 658 of 2009. Adverting to the contention raised on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the final outcome of L.P.A. No. 1489 5 L.P.A No. 167 of 2019 of 2011 would have a bearing on this case, I find myself unable to accept such contention.” 7. Mr. Suraj Singh, the learned counsel for the appellants would still contend that a similar treatment should be accorded to them as has been given to the similarly situated persons who were engaged under the Non-Formal Education scheme in the State of Bihar. 8. In the counter-affidavit filed by the State of Jharkhand before the writ Court, a plea has been raised that the order passed by the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C No. 21391 of 2011 which was unsuccessfully challenged by the State of Bihar before the Hon'ble Supreme Court is of no help to the appellants inasmuch as the order passed by the Patna High Court is only in relation to the employees who were before the Court and the said order cannot be applied in every case. 9. In the records, we do not find any reference as to why the appellants have approached the writ Court about 15 years after they were removed from the service. Not only that, as we have already indicated, the only reason why the appellants came to the writ Court was an order passed by the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C No. 21391 of 2011. This is also not in dispute that by now all the appellants have attained the age of superannuation. Furthermore, we do not find any error in the order passed by the writ Court dismissing W.P.(S) No. 835 of 2015. 10. In the aforesaid state of affairs, we are of the opinion that it would not be proper for this Court to grant any indulgence in this matter and, accordingly, L.P.A No. 167 of 2019 is dismissed. (Shree Chandrashekhar, J.) (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.) Jharkhand High Court Ranchi Dated: 14th June 2023 Amit N.A.F.R