The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.C. (S.B.) No. 05 of 2018 1.Akshay Kumar Rai 2.Jaywanti Guria 3. Paulus Kullu 4.Sunil Kumar Lakra 5.Ashok Kumar Surin 6.Mangal Singh Munda 7.Prashant Tiru 8.Binod Augustine Surin 9.Jagannath Mahto 10.Resina Topno 11.Roshni Fatima Horo 12.Dr. Ranjan Kumar 13.Dinesh Sahu 14.Robert Barjo 15.Prakash Topno 16.Lotheya Topno 17.Herman Topno 18.Rajendra Sahu 19.Philip Barla 20.Ravindra Topno 21.Julius Samad Vs. … Appellants 1.The Principal, St. Josephs College, Tapkara Road, officiating from St. Josephs College, Tapkara Road, Post Torpa, Polist Station Torpa, District- Khunti 2.The Bishop, Roman Catholic Diocese, Residing at Bishop House, Girjatoli, Post Khunti, Police Station Khunti, District-Khunti 3.The Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi Respondents … CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK ---------- For the Appellant For the respondents
Legal Reasoning
: Mrs. Ritu Kumar, Advocate Mr. Vishal Kumar Roy, Advocate : Mr. Sumeet Gadadia, Advocate Mrs. Shilpi Sandil Gadodia, Advocate Mr. Nillohit Choubey, Advocate Ms. Shruti Shekhar, Advocate Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, AC to AAG-III ----------- 15/ 09.02.2024 The appeal has been preferred against the order dated 02.02.2018 passed by Chairman Jharkhand Education Tribunal in Case No.10/2017 (JET). Further prayer has been made for direction to the respondent-State to release the grant in aid for year 2016-17 and 2017-18. It has also been prayed by the learned counsel for the appellant that since the amount was earlier diverted and there is also allegation of misappropriation of fund, order be passed to enquire the matter by a competent authority. -2- 2. The case of the appellant lies in narrow compass. The appellants are the teaching and non-teaching staffs of St. Josephs College, Torpa which is permanently affiliated to Ranchi University. St. Josephs College, Torpa started receiving grant in aid from the Department of Higher and Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand for the first time in the year 2008 under Jharkhand State Unaided Education Institution (Grant) Act, 2004. Thereafter the grant in aid was being disbursed to the College regularly, and appellants were receiving salary. It is specific case of the appellants that though they have received salary but the same has not been paid fully to them. However, it is the case of the respondents that even though grant in aid was not received by the said college, the salary was regularly paid to the appellants and teaching and non-teaching staff of college in advance. The appellants are mainly aggrieved by diversion of the funds and also misappropriation of the funds and hence they had moved the tribunal. The Tribunal vide its order dated 02.02.2018 dismissed the application i.e., Case No.10/2017 (JET) holding therein that “ no direction is needed to be issued to the respondents for disbursement of the grant-in-aid received by from for the Government for the year 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 as they have already spent more than that”. Regarding misappropriation of the amount and diverting the funds, the court was of the view that since the appellants have already received their salary, it cannot be said that there was misappropriation and diversion of the funds. The said order of the tribunal is under challenged before this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that admittedly appellants are receiving salary, earlier also they had received salary which is not in dispute but the salary was not paid in full as per their entitlement. It has been further argued that though the funds were received from the Government as grant-in-aid but the same was mis-utilization as per choice and sweet will of the respondent-college. Learned counsel further argues that the said contention of the appellants were not adjudicated properly rather no finding has been returned only on the basis of the letter of the DEO that there is no diversion of the funds and there is no mis-utilization. The matter was never enquired in detail and as such a direction may be given for disbursement of the fund and also getting the matter enquired by the Deputy Commissioner of the District. -3- 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-College submits that it is not a case of the appellants that they are not receiving salary rather the same was paid in advance to them. Nothing has been brought on record showing that due salary was paid to the appellants in advance and regularly even if the grant-in-aid was not received. Learned counsel further submits that amount of salary was paid much higher even in the grant-in-aid. Learned counsel draws the attention of the Court towards page-86 of the counter-affidavit and submits that even regarding enquiry the matter was enquired by the DEO, Khunti and the report was duly affirmed by the Deputy Commissioner and hence it cannot be said that there was misappropriation of funds and no occasion has arisen for further enquiry. Since allegation of the appellants are baseless having no legs to stand in view of the enquiry report of the DEO and the same has been affirmed by the Collector of the District and on the said ground the Tribunal has rightly not interfered in the matter. It has also been argued that though the salary of the appellants have already been paid but the college has not received any grant for the period of 2016-17 onwards and as such supporting the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants on this ground learned counsel submits that it is the State who had not released the grant-in-aid and as such direction be given to the respondent- State, the Department of HRD to release the grant-in-aid to the said college for payment of salary. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that counter- affidavit has been filed supporting the impugned order. Learned counsel further submits that there is no any illegality or infirmity in the order of the Tribunal. It has further been submitted that since the matter was pending before this Court hence the grant-in-aid was not released to the said college. It is also been argued that the contention of the appellants are not acceptable since they have raised new plea here which was not made before the tribunal and the same it fit to be dismissed. 6. Having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, across the bar, this Court is of the considered view that admittedly the appellants are getting salary which is not dispute, however, it was incumbent upon the respondents-State to disburse the amount and release the fund towards grant- -4- in-aid so that regular salary could be paid to the appellants. The stand of the respondent-college is to that extent that even when grant-in-aid was not received, the college had taken pain to disburse the salary to the appellants and other employee of the college is praiseworthy, however any amount which is being disbursed or released by the State by way of grant-in-aid has to be taken care of and disbursed as per the requirements and terms and conditions of the State as well as the agreement between the college and the State regarding the disbursement of the amount in proper and correct way. Since finger has been raised regarding misappropriation and mis-utilization of the fund, though the matter was enquired earlier, for the ends of justice, this Court directs the Deputy Commissioner, to enquire the matter and after enquiry a detail report shall be submitted before the Department of HRD and thereafter if is found that there is any mis-utilization as per the report, proper action shall be taken in accordance with law. If it is found that there is no mis- utilization of the fund, the release of the fund shall be done regularly and merely because the case was pending before the Court the same cannot be a ground for withholding grant-in-aid by which salary has to be paid to the college. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions the appeal is hereby
Decision
disposed of. 8. Let the enquiry be concluded within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Rohit/- (Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)