Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 772 (PAT)

Indu Prakash v. State Of Bihar

2004-08-02

R.S.GARG

body2004
Judgment 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The respondent Director, Secondary Education and the District Education Officer, Saran are present in person. They have filed their counter. It is submitted in the counter affidavit of respondent no. 3 that all the amount due to the petitioner have been paid and in receipt of the same, she has already issued a letter in favour of the respondents. 3. Though after the letter is issued to the petitioner, nothing further is required to be done in the matter, but I think I must make certain observations in this case. 4. CWJC No. 8110 of 1996 and CWJC No. 8903 of 1996, filed by Smt. Indu Prakash, the present applicant and Smt. Pratibha Singh, were allowed by the High Court on 23.6.2000. This Court observed that the order dated 10.8.1996 cannot be sustained and it was accordingly quashed. The Court further directed that the petitioners stand reinstated to their posts with effect from 10.8.1996 and they would be allowed all consequential benefits including arrears of salary. When the High Court said that the petitioners stood reinstated then the simple words carried simple meaning that nothing further was required to be done and petitioner was required to be allotted some work. 5. On 6.7.2000 the petitioner made an application of joining to the Headmistress, Shanti Raman Project High School, Sarhwara, District Saran (Annexure 3) but unfortunately, the said Headmistress without appreciating the fact and impact of the order passed by this Court, wrote to the Director, Secondary Education that proper instructions be issued to her. Thereafter, as usual, the officers in the Directorate were sleeping and the District Education Officer was not rising to the occasion. It took almost one year and four months to the respondents to come out of their slumber when respondent no. 3 issued an order that the petitioners joining would be from the date of submitting her application. Despite that, the petitioner was not paid her salary. The present application came to be filed on 31.10.2002 but unfortunately, the Director of Education, took the filing of the application to be an ordinary matter and did nothing in the matter. 6. No counter affidavit was filed upto 7.7.2004, therefore, this Court directed that respondent nos. Despite that, the petitioner was not paid her salary. The present application came to be filed on 31.10.2002 but unfortunately, the Director of Education, took the filing of the application to be an ordinary matter and did nothing in the matter. 6. No counter affidavit was filed upto 7.7.2004, therefore, this Court directed that respondent nos. 2 and 3 shall remain in attendance with their counter affidavit and show cause why they be not awarded jail sentence for non-compliance of the order dated 23.6.2000 passed in the abovereferred CWJC. This notice worked as an eye opener and compelled the respondents, who are present in this Court, to come out of their hibernation and pass orders. True it is that as of today, petitioners grievances have been redressed but I must observe that the grievances have been redressed on 30.7.2004. Why the officers of the State Government are so indifferent and lethargic; why cannot they rise to the occasion; why cannot they understand the orders of the High Court, why do they take the High Court for a ride and make an attempt to fiddle with the authority of the High Court? Can these officers of the State Government not understand the orders of the High Court and observe the order right in time to avoid a situation of filing a contempt petition and also to avoid their personal appearance in Court. This Court is not interested in seeing faces of these officers but is interested in observing the orders passed by this Court are being complied with. If a simple threatwhy they should not be sent to jailcan work as magic, then I think this Court should always so write even in its final order disposing of writ applications that if the orders are not complied with, then the particular officer answerable to the orders of the Court shall be taken to task and be sent to jail. The Government officers are public servants. They are not public bosses. They are not to be trained by the High Court or tamed by the High Court. They have to work because they are paid for it. The officers occupying high chairs must not forget that the money paid to them comes from the public exchequer and it is the public money. They are not public bosses. They are not to be trained by the High Court or tamed by the High Court. They have to work because they are paid for it. The officers occupying high chairs must not forget that the money paid to them comes from the public exchequer and it is the public money. If they are public servants, then they must serve the public, instead of sitting in their chairs and awaiting a notice from the High Court to show cause why not they be sent to jail. 7. The present proceedings are, however closed. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary for its onwards circulation to all the departments so that in future at least such proceedings are avoided.