Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 2767 (JHR)

Maya Devi @ Maya Singh v. State Of Jharkhand

2018-12-15

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2018
JUDGMENT Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is the widow of the employee, who she contends, has been missing since 23.04.2010. However, according to her, Respondent no.5 has conducted departmental proceeding in his absence and dismissed him from service by the impugned order bearing memo no. 441 dated 30.06.2014(Annexure-4) in violation of principle of natural justice, more so, when nothing has been heard about the employee since last more than 7 years by now. Petitioner contends that a sanha was also lodged on 21.05.2010 at Baghbera Police Station (Annexure-1). Petitioner submits that order of dismissal has been challenged before the appellate authority i.e., Respondent no. 4 but the same has not yet been decided. Other grounds on merits have also been urged. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent State has defended the impugned order on merits on the basis of the stand taken in the counter affidavit. He has also contested the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment on the basis of the departmental circular where claim for compassionate appointment on the ground of missing of an employee cannot be entertained. However, Respondent State do not dispute that appeal preferred by the petitioner has not yet been decided. The memo of appeal is enclosed as Annexure-5 in support of the submission made in para 10 of the writ petition. 4. Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties in the light of aforesaid factual matrix and since the appeal preferred by the petitioner is stated to be still pending before Respondent no.4, this Court is not inclined to entertain the challenge on merit at this stage. As such, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the appellate authority/ respondent no.4 Deputy Inspector General of Police(Rail), Ranchi to consider and decide the appeal in accordance with law within a reasonable time preferably 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.