GOVINDA PATNAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MOST of the facts are admitted. A chronological chart has been filed by Sri Pal mentioning all important facts. In correct-ness has not been disputed by the learned Standing Counsel. The essential facts, at mentioned therein, are as follows.

(2.) UNDER Section 10 (5) of the Madras Hereditary Village Offices Act (Madras Act 3 of 1895) hereinafter referred to as the Act (which has been replaced by Orissa Act 12 of 1962) with effect from 1 February 1963), the plain-tiff was appointed in 1935 to discharge the duties of the office of a Karji as the heredatary karji, Kashi Parida, was a minor. Kashi Parida died in 1949. He was succeeded by another minor Karji, Kashi Parida, on 8 July 1950, who also died in 1953. On 22 December 1953 another minor Naran Parida become the karji. Plaintiff was allowed to discharge the duties of the office of the karji while these minors became karjis. In the year 1957 plaintiff remained absent from duty on leave. On 20 November 1958 the tahasildar served a notice (Ex. 2) on the plaintiff asking him to join his post within ten days from the receipt of the letter, failing which he was threatened with punishment. Plaintiff joined the next day on 21 November 1958, but the tahasildar did not allow him to take charge of the office and to do the work. On 6 June 1959 the Revenue Divisional Officer by his letter (Ex. 3) directed the tahasildar to hand over charge to the plaintiff. The tahasildar did not obey this order. The Collector in his letters (Ex. 4) dated 27 August 1959 and (Ex. 4/a) dated 19 April 1960 asked the Revenue Divisional Officer to allow the plaintiff to join his post. It is unnecessary to give some other intermediate facts. Again the Collector by his letter (Ex. 5) dated 5 April 1961 asked the Revenue Divisional Officer to allow the plaintiff to discharge the duties of the office of Karji. In May 1961. the decisions of the Supreme. Court in Dasarath Rammer Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh A. I. R. 1961 SC 564 was published. The Revenue Department took the view that the provisions under Section 10 (5) of the Act was unenforceable. On 29 July 1961 the Collector was of opinion that the plaintiff had no case for continuance in service, but be passed no orders terminating his services. In appeal filed by the plaintiff, the Revenue Divisional Commissioner, by his order (Ex. 6/4) dated 27 March 1962, hold that the tahasildar acted in excess of his jurisdiction and the plaintiff should be treated to be on duty from 31 November 1958 until he was relieved from duty. The Orissa Act 12 of 1962, repealing the Act, came into force on 1 February 1963, and from that day the post of the plaintiff for discharging the duties of a karji was terminated.

(3.) PLAINTIFF suit in for recovery of Rs. 1,000 as his salary at the rate of Rs. 20 per month from 21 November 1968 to 31 January 1968. The suit was filed on 10 May 1963.