Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 491 (JHR)

Rupam Sinha v. State of Jharkhand

2014-04-10

R.R.PRASAD

body2014
ORDER The petitioner, a Lecturer in Mahendra Prasad Inter Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Lalpur, Ranchi, applied for grant of medical leave for a week on 07/08/2008. After getting fit to resume her duty, the petitioner reported on 14/08/2008, but the Principal of the college did not allow the petitioner to join her duty, rather on 18/08/2008, an order was passed by the Principal by which the petitioner was forced to go on medical leave for six months. Being aggrieved with that order, a writ application bearing W.P. (S) No. 1314 of 2009, was filed. That writ application was disposed of on 19/10/2011. The operative part of the orders are as follows: “Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it does appear that it was sheer arbitrariness on the part of the Principal of the College to force the petitioner to go for medical leave for six months when the petitioner had never applied for medical leave, rather she had availed medical leave for a week and after availing the same, she reported before the Principal on 14.8.2008 with a certificate of fitness but the Principal did not allow her to join her duty though the certificate of fitness had been produced before him. Subsequently the Principal whimsically passed order forcing the petitioner to go for medical leave for six months without there being any material before him that the petitioner was required medical leave or was medically unfit. Under these situations, the order dated 18.8.2008, as contained in Annexure7, is hereby quashed. Consequently, the petitioner would be entitled to all the consequential financial benefits as she was arbitrarily forced to go for medical leave for six months. The amount be paid to the petitioner with interest @ 6% per annum from the date on which it was legally payable. Accordingly, this writ application is allowed with a cost of Rs. 5,000/which will be paid by the Principal of the College to the petitioner within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order of this Court. If the amount is not paid, the Management of Mahendra Prasad Inter Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Lalpur, Ranchi will deduct the aforesaid amount from the salary of the Principal and the same be paid by the Management to the petitioner within a period of two months upon failure of payment of cost by the Principal of the College. If the amount is not paid, the Management of Mahendra Prasad Inter Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Lalpur, Ranchi will deduct the aforesaid amount from the salary of the Principal and the same be paid by the Management to the petitioner within a period of two months upon failure of payment of cost by the Principal of the College. It goes without saying that the petitioner's joining be accepted immediately.” 2. On 18/11/2011, a review application bearing Civil Review No. 104 of 2011, was filed on behalf of the Principal, Mahendra Prasad Inter Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Lalpur, Ranchi, seeking review of the order passed in the aforesaid writ application on the ground that the petitioner cannot be allowed to join the post as the Science Faculty does not have any affiliation either with the Jharkhand Academic Council or with the Human Resource Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. That review application was disposed of after observing that the matter relating to writ application never concern with the joining of the petitioner in the Department of Physics, rather it was concerned with the matter where the petitioner was forced to go on medical leave for six months, which order was quashed. In that situation, it was held that the order dated 19/10/2011, passed in the writ application never warrants to be reviewed. 3. Thereupon, this contempt application was filed for initiating a proceeding under the Contempt of Court Act against the Principal for not allowing the petitioner to join on the post, which she was holding and also for not paying the consequential financial benefits as ordered by this Court in the writ application. While the matter was pending, a Civil Review application bearing C.M.P. No. 258/2013, came to be filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking modification of the order, passed in civil review application bearing No. 104/2011, wherein it had been observed by this Court that the writ application never concern with the joining of the petitioner in the Department of Physics on the ground that the said observation was made perhaps in inadvertence. The contention, which had been made, appears to be correct. From perusal of the order passed in the writ application, it does appear that when the petitioner after availing medical leave, reported for joining, was not allowed to join, rather she was forced to go on medical leave for six months. The contention, which had been made, appears to be correct. From perusal of the order passed in the writ application, it does appear that when the petitioner after availing medical leave, reported for joining, was not allowed to join, rather she was forced to go on medical leave for six months. The order, under which the petitioner was forced to go on medical leave, was quashed and at the same time, the authorities were directed to accept the petitioner's joining immediately. 4. Thus, the observation made in the review application bearing No. 104/2011 that the matter never pertains to joining seems to have been made due to inadvertence and, thereby, the observation made in the said review application to that effect, is hereby recalled. 5. Now, coming to the matter relating to the contempt, it appears that the contempt petition was filed as according to Mr. Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, O.P. No. 2 has violated the order passed by this Court by not allowing the petitioner to join her duties. In this regard, submission was advanced that O.P. No. 2, has been taking stand that Science Faculty of Mahendra Prasad Inter Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Lalpur, Ranchi, does not have temporary or permanent affiliation, whereas the number of documents, which have been annexed with the petition and also with the rejoinder to the show cause, filed on behalf of the opposite party, go to show that the Science Faculty of the college who always having affiliation and, thereby, the Management of the college had been appointing teacher in the Science Faculty (Physics) and has been taking admission of the students in the Science Faculty (Physics). Learned counsel has also referred to a letter dated 23/09/2013, issued by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi, addressed to the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, to show that the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi, has made recommendation for giving permanent affiliation to the Science Faculty of Mahendra Prasad Inter Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Lalpur, Ranchi, with certain conditions. By placing reliance on the said document and other documents, stand, which was taken by the petitioner is that the college does have permanent affiliation of all the faculties, i.e. Science, Arts and Commerce. However, it was disputed by Mr. By placing reliance on the said document and other documents, stand, which was taken by the petitioner is that the college does have permanent affiliation of all the faculties, i.e. Science, Arts and Commerce. However, it was disputed by Mr. Krishna Shankar, learned counsel appearing for O.P. No. 2 that unless recommendation, made by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi, is approved by the Government, the college will have no permanent affiliation so far Science Faculty is concerned. 6. Further submission, which was advanced on behalf of O.P. No. 2 is that temporarily affiliation was granted up to the Session 200810, but at present there is no temporary or permanent affiliation for the Sessions 2009-11, 2010-12, 2011-13, 2012-14, 2013-15. In this regard, it was pointed out that seven students have been admitted in the Faculty of Science for the Sessions 201315 in anticipation of grant of permanent affiliation, but as the said affiliation has not been granted to the college by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi, all those seven students were allowed to take admission in Bethesada Inter Mahila College, Ranchi. At the same time, it was also stated that there has been no teacher working in the Science Faculty of the college. However, this submission was refuted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by stating that the aforesaid submission is absolutely incorrect. 7. In my view, all these points, raised on behalf of the parties, relating to affiliation or non-affiliation of the Science Faculty of the college, never appear to be relevant so far the matter relating to the contempt is concerned. It be reiterated that when the petitioner was forced to go on medical leave for six months and was not allowed to join the post on availment of the medical leave, the petitioner moved to this Court, whereby the order under which the petitioner was forced to go on medical leave, was quashed and the authority was directed to accept the joining immediately. At the same time, consequential benefits were also directed to be paid to the petitioner. Pursuant to that order, the petitioner seems to have been allowed to join her post, which is evident from the statement made in para4 of the contempt petition, which reads as follows: “4. At the same time, consequential benefits were also directed to be paid to the petitioner. Pursuant to that order, the petitioner seems to have been allowed to join her post, which is evident from the statement made in para4 of the contempt petition, which reads as follows: “4. That in compliance of the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 19.10.2011 in W.P. (S) No. 1314 of 2009 and as per direction of this Hon'ble Court, the petitioner filed an application dated 12.11.2011 and reported in the office of opposite party No.2the Principal of Mahendra Prasad Mahila Inter College, Lalpur, District Ranchi. Her joining was accepted on the same date as noted on the application itself.” 8. The factum of the joining on the said post further gets substantiated from the statement made in para-5 of the petition, which reads as follows: “5. That subsequent to this the petitioner in person and through representation requested the Principal Opposite Party No. 2 for allowing her to engage classes and make necessary provision for the same in the routine but the same was not done, rather she was asked that Inter Science classes for Physics were over and her services were not required and at appropriate time she will be asked and communicated about the order in the matter.” 9. From perusal of the aforesaid statements, it is evident that the petitioner was allowed to join but, subsequently, she was not allowed to discharge her duties as according to the college authority, the services of the petitioner were not required. Since, the petitioner was not allowed to discharge her duties after she was allowed to join the post pursuant to the order passed by this Court, this contempt petition has been filed for noncompliance of the order passed by this Court in the writ application. But, it the writ application, this was never the issue that the petitioner is being not allowed to join as her services were not required, rather that cause of action seems to have fallen only after the petitioner was allowed to join and, therefore, that cannot be a subject matter of the contempt petition. 10. But, it the writ application, this was never the issue that the petitioner is being not allowed to join as her services were not required, rather that cause of action seems to have fallen only after the petitioner was allowed to join and, therefore, that cannot be a subject matter of the contempt petition. 10. It be further stated that the submissions was advanced on behalf of the petitioner that filing of the review application with the statement that the petitioner cannot be allowed to join the post as the post of Science Faculty does not have any affiliation either with the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi or with the Human Resource Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi, is itself testimony of the fact that the petitioner was never allowed to join, but this fact cannot take precedence over the specific statements made on behalf of the petitioner as indicated above that the petitioner was allowed to join the post pursuant to the order passed by this Court. It would have been appropriate for the petitioner to challenge the order before an appropriate forum. 11. So far the matter relating to the payment of the consequential benefits are concerned, statement has been made on behalf of the petitioner that those benefits have never been given. However, from the show cause, submitted on behalf of O.P. No. 2, it does appear that the statement has been made that a cheque of Rs. 34,790/towards six months salary with 6% interest and also the cost of Rs. 5,000/has been issued. That apart, other cheques with respect to other monetary benefits has also been issued, which, according to the learned counsel appearing for O.P. No. 2, has not been received by the petitioner. However, it be stated that the same is payable to the petitioner. 12. In that event, I do not find case of contempt being made out and, thereby, this contempt petition is hereby dismissed. However, the civil review application bearing C.M.P. No. 258 of 2013 is disposed of in the light of the observation made therein.