Shiv Ram Kisku and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1085878
CourtJharkhand High Court
Decided OnSep-11-2013
AppellantShiv Ram Kisku and ors
RespondentState of Jharkhand and ors
Excerpt:
in the high court of jharkhand at ranchi wp(s) no. 3622 of 2011 ­­­­   shiv ram kisku & ors. ... … petitioners  ­versus­ the state of jharkhand and ors. ... ... respondents ­­­­ with wp(s) no. 3901 of 2011 ­­­­ ravi kant bharti ... … petitioner  ­versus­ the state of jharkhand and ors. ... ... respondents ­­­­ coram :  hon’ble mr. justice aparesh kumar singh ­­­­ for the petitioners    :m/s. s.prasad & a.k.jha   for the respondents   :m/s. a.chatterjee, jc to sr.sc i &   sunil singh, jc to sc ii ­­­­ 4­  11.9.2013 heard learned counsel for the parties. in  w.p.(s)   no.   3622   of   2011   there   are   thirteen   petitioners   in   all  while in w.p.(s) no. 3901 of 2011 there is sole petitioner. all   these   petitioners   have   approached   this   court   with   their  grievances that they have been restrained from discharging their duties  as para teachers in different schools in meharma block in the  district of  godda. the petitioners have also a grievance that respondents have not  released   their   salary   though   they   had   discharged   their   duties   in   the  respective schools till august 2010. according to these petitioners, after following all the procedure  and   obtaining   the   approval,   they   were   selected   as   para   teachers   and  posted   in   different   school   of   meharma   block,   district   godda   and  appointment letters were issued on 25.03.2010. thereafter, they joined  respective schools where they are posted and started discharging their  duties.   they   have   got   the   requisite   qualifications   as   well.   however,  certain anonymous complaints were made without any basis relating to  their appointments, on which order has been passed on 26.08.2010 by  the   district   superintendent   of   education,   vide   annexure­3,   by   which  they have been stopped   from discharging their duties. therefore, they  have moved this court as they have not been given any notice before  2. issuing of such an order.  the respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavit.  they   have   exhaustively   dealt   with   the   procedures   under   which  appointment of para teachers is to be made. however it has been stated  on   their   behalf   that   a   complaint   has   been   received   relating   to  genuineness of the appointment of these petitioners. the inquiry was  directed to be conducted   by  the  deputy  development   commissioner,  godda.   upon   submission   of   such   inquiry   the   deputy   commissioner,  godda has directed that the petitioners be restrained from discharging  their   duties.  the   report   has   been   annexed   as   annexure­6   to   the   writ  application.  it, however, does not appear from the statement made on behalf  of the respondents that any final decision has been taken on the basis of  such   report   by   the   competent   authority   i.e.   deputy     commissioner,  godda. it also does not appear that the inquiry report, annexure­6, was  prepared after giving any notice to the petitioners to respond  the same.  in such circumstances, therefore, it appears that though any final  decision has not been taken in respect of appointment of the petitioners  by the competent authority, the petitioners have been restrained from  discharging their duties as para teachers in the respective schools on the  basis   of   inquiry   report,   annexure­6,   under   the   signature   of   deputy  development commissioner, godda. having   heard   learned   counsel   for   the   parties,   it   is,   therefore,  desirable   that  the   competent   authority/deputy   commissioner,   godda  takes a final decision by passing a reasoned and speaking in accordance  with law after giving at least one opportunity to these petitioners to show  cause   in   the   matter   of   their   appointments   within   a   period   of   sixteen  weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. the competent  authority/deputy commissioner, godda, should also  consider and take  a   decision   on   claim   of   salary   of   these   petitioners   in   the   same   order  passed,   which   should   be   also   communicated   to   the   individual  petitioners.3. accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of. i.a. no. 4294 of 2013 in w.p.(s) no. 3622 of 2011 and i.a. no. 4295  of 2013 in w.p.(s) no. 3901 of 2011 also stand disposed of. (aparesh kumar singh, j. ) pandey 
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(S) No. 3622 of 2011 ­­­­   Shiv Ram Kisku & ors. ... … Petitioners  ­Versus­ The State of Jharkhand and ors. ... ... Respondents ­­­­ with WP(S) No. 3901 of 2011 ­­­­ Ravi Kant Bharti ... … Petitioner  ­Versus­ The State of Jharkhand and ors. ... ... Respondents ­­­­ CORAM :  HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH ­­­­ For the Petitioners    :M/s. S.Prasad & A.K.Jha   For the Respondents   :M/s. A.Chatterjee, JC to Sr.SC I &   Sunil Singh, JC to SC II ­­­­ 4­  11.9.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties. In  W.P.(S)   No.   3622   of   2011   there   are   thirteen   petitioners   in   all  while in W.P.(S) No. 3901 of 2011 there is sole petitioner. All   these   petitioners   have   approached   this   Court   with   their  grievances that they have been restrained from discharging their duties  as para teachers in different schools in Meharma Block in the  District of  Godda. The petitioners have also a grievance that respondents have not  released   their   salary   though   they   had   discharged   their   duties   in   the  respective schools till August 2010. According to these petitioners, after following all the procedure  and   obtaining   the   approval,   they   were   selected   as   para   teachers   and  posted   in   different   school   of   Meharma   Block,   District   Godda   and  appointment letters were issued on 25.03.2010. Thereafter, they joined  respective schools where they are posted and started discharging their  duties.   They   have   got   the   requisite   qualifications   as   well.   However,  certain anonymous complaints were made without any basis relating to  their appointments, on which order has been passed on 26.08.2010 by  the   District   Superintendent   of   Education,   vide   Annexure­3,   by   which  they have been stopped   from discharging their duties. Therefore, they  have moved this Court as they have not been given any notice before  2. issuing of such an order.  The respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavit.  They   have   exhaustively   dealt   with   the   procedures   under   which  appointment of para teachers is to be made. However it has been stated  on   their   behalf   that   a   complaint   has   been   received   relating   to  genuineness of the appointment of these petitioners. The inquiry was  directed to be conducted   by  the  Deputy  Development   Commissioner,  Godda.   Upon   submission   of   such   inquiry   the   Deputy   Commissioner,  Godda has directed that the petitioners be restrained from discharging  their   duties.  The   report   has   been   annexed   as   Annexure­6   to   the   writ  application.  It, however, does not appear from the statement made on behalf  of the respondents that any final decision has been taken on the basis of  such   report   by   the   competent   authority   i.e.   Deputy     Commissioner,  Godda. It also does not appear that the inquiry report, Annexure­6, was  prepared after giving any notice to the petitioners to respond  the same.  In such circumstances, therefore, it appears that though any final  decision has not been taken in respect of appointment of the petitioners  by the competent authority, the petitioners have been restrained from  discharging their duties as para teachers in the respective schools on the  basis   of   inquiry   report,   Annexure­6,   under   the   signature   of   Deputy  Development Commissioner, Godda. Having   heard   learned   counsel   for   the   parties,   it   is,   therefore,  desirable   that  the   competent   authority/Deputy   Commissioner,   Godda  takes a final decision by passing a reasoned and speaking in accordance  with law after giving at least one opportunity to these petitioners to show  cause   in   the   matter   of   their   appointments   within   a   period   of   sixteen  weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The competent  authority/Deputy Commissioner, Godda, should also  consider and take  a   decision   on   claim   of   salary   of   these   petitioners   in   the   same   order  passed,   which   should   be   also   communicated   to   the   individual  petitioners.

3. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of. I.A. No. 4294 of 2013 in W.P.(S) No. 3622 of 2011 and I.A. No. 4295  of 2013 in W.P.(S) No. 3901 of 2011 also stand disposed of. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. ) Pandey