Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 349 (JHR)

Awadhesh Kumar Dubey v. State Of Jharkhand

2002-03-13

TAPEN SEN

body2002
ORDER Tapen Sen, J. 1. Heard Mr. P.K. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shamim Akhtar, learned S.C. II. 2. Mr. Shamim Akhtar states that in spite of his best effort he has not been able to obtain instructions pursuant to the order dated 27.9.2001. He, however, suggests that the matter can be disposed off at this stage by giving a direction to the respondent authority to took into the matter. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also does not oppose such a suggestion. According to the petitioner, he has made a prayer for payment according to the scale of B.A. Trained Teacher to which, according to him, he is entitled since 1.4.1983. In spite of that he is being given only Matric Trained Scale. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that even the then District Superintendent of Education, Sahebgunj had passed an order as early as on 6.8.1983 holding that the petitioner was allowed the scale of B.A. Trained Teacher (w.e.f. 1.4.1983). The petitioner states that he is a B.A. Trained Teacher and in spite of specific orders passed by the then District Superintendent of Education, Sahebgunj, no orders have been passed giving him proper benefits. 4. The petitioner has also stated that he is a senior teacher and other persons junior to him are getting B.A. Trained Teacher Scale. The petitioner has also stated that he has Filed a representation before the appropriate authority and had also sent a legal notice vide Annexure 3 but they have not been replied to till date. 5. Without going into merits of the case, at this stage, particularly on account of the fact that granting of a B.A. Trained Teacher Scale is the work of the department, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to once again file a fresh representation before the Respondent No. 3 (District Superintendent of Education, Godda) taking all possible and permissible points/pleas that he may choose to, within a period of two weeks. 6. It goes without saying that the respondent No. 3, on receipt of such representation shall immediately look into the matter, give all reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law. While passing such order he shall have due regard to the fact that his predecessor in office had passed an order as early as on 6.8.1983. While passing such order he shall have due regard to the fact that his predecessor in office had passed an order as early as on 6.8.1983. He shall look into that order and consider the propriety and or legality of the same. The respondent No. 3 shall dispose off the representation in the manner indicated above, within a period of four months from the date he receives such representation. 7. With the aforementioned observations and directions this writ petition stands disposed off.