Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 164 (JHR)

Pramod Kumar Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2011-03-09

J.C.S.RAWAT

body2011
Order This petition has been filed for seeking the following relief: (i) issuance of an appropriate writ/ order/direction or a writ in nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to immediately and forthwith for placing the petitioners' seniority in the appropriate place considering their appointment of 1993, as the petitioners as well as others have been reappointed in term of the decision of the Government and also in term of the rule as well as guidelines, the seniority has to be counted from the date of appointment, but the case of the petitioners have• been ignored and they have been place at Sl. Nos. 87, 81 and 80 respectively; (ii) and/or for further issuance of an appropriate writ, order, direction as your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. 2. In nutshell the petitioners are claiming their seniority and continuation of their services from the date when their services have been dispensed with i.e. from 9.2.1998. The petitioners had been appointed as Dalpaties and thereafter their services were dispensed with. The Government, vide order dated 14.11.2004, reappointed the Dalpaties whose services has already been dispensed with by the Government. The petitioners are claiming to place them in the appropriate place considering their appointment of 1993 from the period of 1998 to 2005, be counted towards their services. 3. The learned counsel for the respondents has refuted the contention and averred in the counter affidavit that the petitioners who were appointed in the year 1993 were dispensed with from their services by the order of erstwhile State of Bihar dated 9.2.1998. Thereafter, the Jharkhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2001 was enforced with effect from 10.5.2001 and, Gram Raksha Dal Niyamawali, 2002 came into force with effect from 1.6.2002. This Court in L.P.A. No. 533 of 2002, directed that retrenched Dalpaties may be reappointed if the Government desires so and also directed to take a decision in this regard. The Government has also taken a decision in the year 2004 in which reappointments of Dalpaties were directed to be made by the competent authority and it was also indicated in the Circular that the period spent in services prior to their reappointment as Dalpaties shall not be counted nor any payment shall be made to them for that period. The Government has also taken a decision in the year 2004 in which reappointments of Dalpaties were directed to be made by the competent authority and it was also indicated in the Circular that the period spent in services prior to their reappointment as Dalpaties shall not be counted nor any payment shall be made to them for that period. It was further indicated in the G.O. that the financial benefits would accrue to them only from the date of joining of their services after reappointment and their earlier services would not be counted after the new appointment. At the last, the respondents made a prayer to dismiss the petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is admitted by the parties that the petitioner were appointed as Dalpaties in the year. 1993 and thereafter their services were dispensed with in the year 1998. Thereafter, the Government accused a Circular. (Annexure-1) on 14.11 .2004 to reappoint, the Dalpaties whose services have been retrenched by Government order dated 9.2.1998. 5. The only question arises for consideration as to whether the Dalpaties who were reappointed pursuant to the Government order (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) can get the benefit of continuation of service from 1998 to 2005 or not. Whether they can be placed in the seniority list in appropriate place considering their appointment of 1993. The Government order (Annexure-1) contained in paragraph 'ka', which is as follows: 'Ka' dinank 23.8.93 se niukta nirast dalpati/panchayat sevak adhisuchit chetralgair adhisuchit chetra ko unko punarniukti ki jaye tatha punarniukti ke falswaroop unke yogdan dene ko tithi se arthik labh deye hoga. Punarniukti ke purb ko abdhi me ki gayi seva kisi priyogan ke liye pariganit nahi ki gaygi 'or na he ukat awdhi ke liye kisi parkar ka bhugtan anumanya panchayat sachiv (niukti seva sart avam kartavay) niyamawali, 2002 me pravdhanit adhiktam umarsima dalpati se panchayat sevak ke pad par niukati ke liye hi manya hoga." 6. It is clear from the' above extracted portion that the Dalpaties would not get any benefit of the past services rendered by them and they will not get any pecuniary benefit prior to the date of reappointment. The above extracted order of the Government is clear, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get any benefit of their past services. 7. As such, this petition is liable to be dismissed. The above extracted order of the Government is clear, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get any benefit of their past services. 7. As such, this petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. No order as to cost.