Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 54 (JHR)

Vijoy Prakash v. State of Jharkhand

2018-01-08

ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, D.N.PATEL

body2018
ORDER : D.N. Patel, J. I.A. No. 9683 of 2017 : This interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 36 days in preferring this Letters Patent Appeal. 2. Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the reasons stated in this interlocutory application, especially in paragraph Nos. 4, 5 and 6, there are reasonable reasons for condonation of delay. We, therefore condone the delay of 36 days in preferring this Letters Patent Appeal. 3. This interlocutory application is, therefore, allowed and disposed of. L.P.A. No. 189 of 2017 : 1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the original petitioner, who had preferred W.P. (S) No. 6197 of 2015 for grant of promotion on the post of Reader with effect from 1st September, 1980. This prayer was not accepted by the learned Single Judge and, hence, original petitioner has preferred present Letters Patent Appeal. Reasons : 2. Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that in earlier round of litigation, the matter had reached up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997 which was decided vide order dated 12th October, 2004. Hon'ble the Supreme Court had appointed a Committee of Retired Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.C. Agrawal, which is popularly known as Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission because of several irregularities committed by the University and Colleges in the appointment of Lecturers and in granting promotion without qualification and subsequent obtained qualifications etc. 3. Ultimately, the report was given by the Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission in detail. The observations made for this appellant (original petitioner) in the report of Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission read as under : "Sri Vijay Prakash was appointed as Lecturer in Philosophy by order dated August 30, 1980. On the date of appointment he did not have a consistently good academic record inasmuch as he had not obtained an aggregate of 50% marks in two previous examinations as required under the 1978 statutes, which were applicable. He, however, had first class Post Graduation qualification. He became eligible for consideration on May 9, 1988." (Emphasis supplied) 4. The aforesaid observations have been pointed out in Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission, which is at Annexure-A to the counter-affidavit filed in the writ petition by the respondent-University. 5. He, however, had first class Post Graduation qualification. He became eligible for consideration on May 9, 1988." (Emphasis supplied) 4. The aforesaid observations have been pointed out in Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission, which is at Annexure-A to the counter-affidavit filed in the writ petition by the respondent-University. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts, it appears that this appellant has obtained qualification later on with effect from 9th May, 1988 and, hence, his services were regularized with effect from 9th May, 1988 as per the notification issued by the Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh which is at Annexure 7 to the memo of this Letters Patent Appeal. 6. It further appears from the facts of the case that the report given by the Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission has become part and parcel of the order passed in Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997, which was finally disposed of on 12th October, 2004 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thus, Annexure-7 and observation of the Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission is part and parcel of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 7. Thus, it appears that after 2004 approximately one decade period was lapsed and again this issue was raised by this appellant before Justice S.B. Sinha Commission, constituted by the Hon'ble, Supreme Court for regularization of the Lecturers, Justice S.B. Sinha Commission has observed as under : "ORDER DATED 7.8.2014 VINOBA BHAVE UNIVERSITY CHAS COLLEGE 1. Dr. Din Bandhu Goswami 2. Vijay Prakash 3. Narmadeshwar Jha 4. Mohammad Abdullah The Claim Petitions of the abovementioned members of the reaching staff were heard. These four Claim Petitions are premised on an order dated 29.1.1986, passed by the Hon'ble Chancellor of the University in purported exercise of his powers under Section 5(2) of the Inter University Board Act, 1981. It is accepted at the Bar that a Division Bench of the Patna High Court in the case of Shiv Narayan v. State of Bihar, reported in 2001 PLJR 817 , opined that the Hon'ble Chancellor has no jurisdiction to issue such a direction. However, it appears that subsequently another Bench of the Patna High Court doubted the correctness of the said judgment and, referred the matter to the larger Bench. In that view of the matter Justice Agrawal Commission had refused to entertain those claim petitions. However, it appears that subsequently another Bench of the Patna High Court doubted the correctness of the said judgment and, referred the matter to the larger Bench. In that view of the matter Justice Agrawal Commission had refused to entertain those claim petitions. Following the same, this Commission also in its order dated 11.7.2014 opined that these claim petitions are not maintainable in as much as it was accepted at the bar that the larger Bench has not yet delivered its judgment. It was furthermore observed that the judgment of the Division Bench passed in Shiv Pd. case (supra), is binding on this Commission. Keeping in view of order dated 11.7.2014 these claim petitions are dismissed with similar observations. NEW DELHI 7.8.2014 Sd/- (S.B. Sinha)" (Emphasis supplied) 8. In view of the aforesaid observation made by the Justice S.B. Sinha Commission, no relief was granted to this appellant. Justice S.B. Sinha Commission has also accepted the report of the Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission which was part and parcel of Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997 and which was finally disposed of vide order dated 12th October, 2004. 9. In view of the aforesaid reports, given by the Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission as well as the report given by the Justice S.B. Sinha Commission, we see no reason to change the date of regularization of this appellant. 10. Even otherwise also, looking to the qualification obtained by this appellant for the post of Lecturer with effect from 9th May, 1988, and not from 18th November, 1980, the date of initial joining. He was not having that qualification and, therefore, this appellant cannot be regularized from the date on which he was not even qualified for the post of Lecturer. The qualification for the post of Lecturer was obtained later on and, hence, no error has been committed by the learned Single Judge while dismissing W.P. (S) No.6197 of 2015 vide order dated 25th January, 2017. This Letters Patent Appeal is, therefore, dismissed with a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand). This amount will be deposited by this appellant before the Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development & Social Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi towards the Juvenile Justice Fund. This Letters Patent Appeal is, therefore, dismissed with a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand). This amount will be deposited by this appellant before the Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development & Social Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi towards the Juvenile Justice Fund. This amount will be deposited in Bank A/c No. 3734498462-5, Jharkhand Juvenile Justice Fund, State Bank of India, Project Bhawan, Hatia, either by cheque or bank draft, within a period of four weeks from today towards Juvenile Justice Fund, failing which, the amount of cost will be deducted in four equal monthly installments from the salary of this appellant by the respondent-University and the same will be deposited towards Jharkhand Juvenile Justice Fund, which will be utilized for the welfare of the juveniles as per the duties assigned by the State in the Juvenile Justice Act. 11. Copy of this order will be sent to the : (i) Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development & Social Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi; and (ii) Member Secretary, Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority, Nyaya Sadan, Doranda, Ranchi. Appeal dismissed with cost.