Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1757 (JHR)

Sheikh Anwar Hussain v. State of Jharkhand

2012-12-19

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2012
ORDER 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has sought for reinstatement in service by directing the respondent no.4, Director, Rehabilitation and Land Acquisition Irrigation Department, Bihar, Patna and further for payment of salary from February, 1997 along with other consequential benefits. The petitioner has also sought quashing of the order dated 20th February, 1997 vide Letter No.550 issued by the Bihar Government's Rehabilitation and Land Acquisition Department, Annexure-3, under the signature of the Director, Rehabilitation and Land Acquisition Department. The petitioner claimed to be appointed as a IV Grade employee in the Department of Rehabilitation and Land Acquisition, Bihar vide Memo No.120 dated 16th March, 1983 in the scale of Rs.350-425/- along with other allowances by order of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, North Koel Project, Daltonganj, Palamau. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that while the petitioner was in service, other temporary employees were regularized and he was discriminated by the Special Officer, Land Acquisition, North Koel Project, Daltonganj, although his name was in the list prepared for such persons engaged on temporary basis by the said Land Acquisition Officer. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 27th November, 1996 by the Director, respondent no.4 and was finally dismissed from service vide letter No.550 dated 22nd February, 1997. Counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been dismissed from service after remaining 14 years in service and after having received all payments and other allowances regularly on simple ground that he could not produce a copy of the appointment letter when he was asked to do so because of illness of his son during that period. Being aggrieved by the said order, he approached this Court for the aforesaid relief. 4. The petitioner has also filed a supplementary affidavit annexing the service book and Provident Fund Book while he was working as Zanzeerwahak in the office of Special Land Acquisition Department, North Koel Project, Daltonganj. 5. The respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavit. It is stated on behalf of the respondents that it was detected by the erstwhile Government of Bihar that in the Directorate of Rehabilitation and Land acquisition, Water Resources Department, a large number of employees were appointed irregularly and their files were also missing. 5. The respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavit. It is stated on behalf of the respondents that it was detected by the erstwhile Government of Bihar that in the Directorate of Rehabilitation and Land acquisition, Water Resources Department, a large number of employees were appointed irregularly and their files were also missing. All such employees, whose appointment letters were not available in the Directorate, were asked to submit their appointment letters to ascertain legality of appointment. The petitioner was also given several opportunities to produce the appointment letter and despite several show cause letters, such as letter dated 29.11.1996 published through news paper, the petitioner could not produce his appointment letter to the Directorate for verification of the legality of his appointment. In these circumstances, the petitioner's appointment was terminated and similar orders were passed in respect of other employees also, who were similarly situated and whose appointments were found to be illegal. Counsel for the respondents has referred a judgment delivered by the Patna High Court in LPA No.675/2000 and 26 other analogous cases wherein termination order passed in respect of such persons has been upheld. On these facts, it is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner has failed to show any appointment letter in his favour when the matter was inquired in the year 1996-97 and has moved this Court after 6 years of his termination. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. From perusal of office order as contained in Annexure 1 dated 16.3.1983, it is found that the alleged appointment was totally temporary. However, the petitioner in spite of having custody of the document claimed to be the appointment letter, did not produce it at the time of preliminary inquiry conducted by the respondents to ascertain the genuineness and legality of the appointment. The order of termination was issued on failure of the petitioner to produce any evidence in support of his appointment. The matter was being inquired into as it was noticed by the State of Bihar that several illegal appointments were made in different offices of the Special Land Acquisition Officer under the Directorate of Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar and in relation to that there were no records in the Directorate. The matter was being inquired into as it was noticed by the State of Bihar that several illegal appointments were made in different offices of the Special Land Acquisition Officer under the Directorate of Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar and in relation to that there were no records in the Directorate. It appears that these matters were also agitated in the Letters Patent Court before the Patna High Court and the Letters Patent Court upheld the order of termination in the aforesaid LPA no.675/2000 and other analogous cases. 7. In these facts and circumstances, I do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed.