BISHWANATH MAHTO Vs. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER JAMTARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays for quashing annexure "5". By annexure "5" the Sub-divisional Officer, Jamtara, upheld the appointment of Prasanna Mahto (respondent No. 3) to this post of Choukidar.

(2.) The relevant facts are these : Chatur Mahto had two sons, namely, Padma Mahto and Prasanna Mahto Chatur Mahto was the Choukidar of village Gulu Dumaria within the district of Santhal Parganas. After his death Padma Mahto was appointed as Choukidar of that village Padma Mahto died in 1944 and after that Prasanna Mahto was appointed as Choukidar-vide annexure "2". The Sub-divisional Officer made a conditional order while appointing Prasanna Mahto as Choukidar. The order of appointment was that Prasanna Mahto was appointed till Bishwanath Mahto (Petitioner) attained majority. On 4th April, 1978 Bishwanath Mahto filed an application that he could be appointed in place of Prasanna Mahto. It is mentioned in the report of the Choukidari Officer that Bishwanath Mahto did not care to file an application for his appointment, though he attained majority 20 or 22 years ago. The Sub-divisional Officer considered the report of the Choukidari Officer and rejected the application of the petitioner for the appointment to the post of Choukidar vide annexure "5".

(3.) On the finding of the Sub-divisional Officer, it is clear that Prasanna Mahto had been working as Choukidar since 1944. It is also stated in the order that his work is satisfactory. The Sub-divisional Officer also held that since the petitioner did not apply for the post of Choukidar when he attained majority, and as such the petition for appointment was not accepted.