irmiah Kujur Vs. the State of Jharkhand,

irmiah Kujur vs The State of Jharkhand, ;The Director, Primary Education and the District Superintendent of Educatio

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Mar 26, 2010

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/848985

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/848985
Court: Jharkhand High Court
Judge: D.G.R. Patnaik, J.
Decided On: Mar 26, 2010
Subject: Service

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- What remains to be seen is as to whether Pinki died an un-natural death within seven years of her marriage and whether her death was attributable to the demand of dowry and further whether she was dealt with cruelty soon before her death. If these ingredients are proved by the prosecution then the conviction of th...

Key legal issue: Service

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

irmiah Kujur

Respondent

The State of Jharkhand, ;The Director, Primary Education and the District Superintendent of Educatio

Excerpt

- what remains to be seen is as to whether pinki died an un-natural death within seven years of her marriage and whether her death was attributable to the demand of dowry and further whether she was dealt with cruelty soon before her death. if these ingredients are proved by the prosecution then the conviction of the accused under section 304b, ipc will be complete.[para 9] the question is, in the absence of corpus delicti, could it be presumed that the accused persons alone were responsible for the death of pinki. we must hasten to add here that the accused persons have already been acquitted of the murder charge. [para 9] it is clear that pinki's death was caused because of the burns and not in the normal circumstances. the finding of the trial court and the appellate court in that behalf is correct. for this reason we are not impressed by the argument of the learned counsel that in the absence of corpus delicti, the conviction could not stand. [para10] it is clear that the prosecution has not only proved the offence under section 304b, ipc with the aid of section 113b, indian evidence act but also the offence under section 201, ipc. [para 15] held: we have gone through the judgments of the trial court as well as the appellate court carefully and we find that both the courts have fully considered all the aspects of this matter. we, therefore, find nothing wrong with the judgments and confirm the same. the appeal is, therefore, dismissed.[para 16].....lohardaga, riyasat ali, headmaster, middle school, kisko, lohardaga and janak sahu, headmaster, middle school, hesapiri, lohardaga, who, according to the petitioner, have been given the -benefit of the junior and senior selection grades despite the fact that they come under' the general category, whereas the petitioner falls under the tribal quota.6. in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 3, stand has been taken that since the petitioner was granted the pay scales of intermediate and graduate trained teacher after his initial appointment on matric trained scale, it is deemed that he has already acquired two promotions and therefore he is not entitled to any further promotions at all.7. the above stand, as taken by the respondents, appear to be misconceived and contrary to the policy decision of the state government as indicated in the circular dated 18.12.1984, which declares that the teachers who are in the graduate trained scale, shall be given the benefits of the junior selection grade and senior selection grade from the dates stipulated in the notification itself. there is no reason why the petitioner should be deprived and denied the benefits of such government policy.8. considering the above facts and circumstances, this application is disposed of with a direction to the district education establishment committee, lohardaga to consider the petitioner's claim for the grant of the junior and senior selection grades from the dates applicable as per the government circular dated 18.12.1984 and also in the light of the petitioner's claim that other teachers junior to him, have already been given such benefits and within three months from the date of this order, take an appropriate decision by passing a reasoned and speaking order and communicate such decision to the petitioner effectively. in the event the petitioner is found eligible for the benefits of the junior and senior selection grades from the dates applicable, then the district.....

Full Judgment

D.G.R. Patnaik, J.

1. Heard counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to consider his case for grant of the benefit of Junior Selection Grade on Graduate Trained Scale with effect from 01.04.1981 and of Senior Selection Grade with effect from 01.04.1983.

3. The grounds on which the petitioner has raised his claims are two fold - firstly, the policy decision taken by the State Government in the concerned department, as reflected in the Government Circular dated 18.12.1984, and secondly, that the same benefits have been granted to other teachers similarly situated like the petitioner.

4. From the admitted facts of the petitioner's case, it appears that he was initially appointed as a teacher on the Matric Trained Scale. Subsequently he obtained a higher qualification of Intermediate whereupon he was given the scale applicable to the Intermediates. Later, he obtained a graduate degree and in pursuance of such degree, he was granted the Graduate Trained Scale.

5. The petitioner's grievance is that in pursuance to the notification of the State Government issued vide its Circular No. 2440 dated 18.12.1984, the Graduate Trained teachers who were working as on the date of notification, were entitled to get the Junior Selection Grade with effect from 01.04.1981 and after a gap of three years, they were entitled to the grant of Senior Selection Grade. The petitioner was granted the Graduate Trained Scale way back in 1979 and therefore since on the date of the issuance of the Government Circular the petitioner was already getting the Graduate Trained Scale, he was entitled for the grant of Junior and Senior Selection Grades as and when he acquired the eligibility for the same, yet despite, such eligibility being acquired by the petitioner and despite the government's police decision, the petitioner was not given the benefits either of the Junior Selection Grade or the Senior Selection Grade though other teachers similarly situated, have been given the same benefits. The petitioner has referred in this context to the cases of three other teachers namely Sita Ram Sah, retired Headmaster of Nawaripara School, Lohardaga, Riyasat Ali, Headmaster, Middle School, Kisko, Lohardaga and Janak Sahu, Headmaster, Middle School, Hesapiri, Lohardaga, who, according to the petitioner, have been given the -benefit of the Junior and Senior Selection Grades despite the fact that they come under' the General Category, whereas the petitioner falls under the tribal quota.

6. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 3, stand has been taken that since the petitioner was granted the pay scales of Intermediate and Graduate Trained Teacher after his initial appointment on Matric Trained Scale, it is deemed that he has already acquired two promotions and therefore he is not entitled to any further promotions at all.

7. The above stand, as taken by the respondents, appear to be misconceived and contrary to the policy decision of the State Government as indicated in the Circular dated 18.12.1984, which declares that the teachers who are in the Graduate Trained Scale, shall be given the benefits of the Junior Selection Grade and Senior Selection Grade from the dates stipulated in the notification itself. There is no reason why the petitioner should be deprived and denied the benefits of such government policy.

8. Considering the above facts and circumstances, this application is disposed of with a direction to the District Education Establishment Committee, Lohardaga to consider the petitioner's claim for the grant of the Junior and Senior Selection Grades from the dates applicable as per the Government Circular dated 18.12.1984 and also in the light of the petitioner's claim that other teachers junior to him, have already been given such benefits and within three months from the date of this order, take an appropriate decision by passing a reasoned and speaking order and communicate such decision to the petitioner effectively. In the event the petitioner is found eligible for the benefits of the Junior and Senior Selection Grades from the dates applicable, then the District Superintendent of Education shall assess the total amount of arrears on the difference of the monetary benefits which could be legitimately payable to the petitioner and pay the same within one month from the date of decision taken on the petitioner's case.

With these observations, this writ application is disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the respondent State.

Same Court & Year Jharkhand · 2010 Same Parties irmiah Kujur vs The State of Jharkhand, ;The Director, Primar... Same Subject Service Same Judge D.G.R. Patnaik, J.

Service