NARENDRA PANDEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This proceeding arises out of the violation of certain orders passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3052 of 1983. There are eight opposite parties but contempt proceedings had been initiated against opposite parties Nos. 2 to 8 only under the Contempt of Courts Act. The facts leading to the initiation of this proceeding are as follows:

(2.) The aforesaid writ application was filed on 19th July, 1983 and was placed for admission on 21st July, 1983, when after admitting the application the following interim order was passed. During the pendency of this application, respondent No. 2 is directed to pay all arrears of salary by 21st of Auciust, 1983, and the current salary forthwith.T The mall concerned at that stage for complying with the aforesaid interim order was respondent No; 2, the District Superintendent of Education, West Champaran at Bettiah, of the writ application. He is opposite party No. 2 in this proceeding. As stated above, the interim order was required to be complied with by the 21st August, 1983. Without complying with that order on 20th August, 1983, i.e., one day before the last date for complying with the interim order, a petition was filed for modifying the same. This petition appears to have been filed on behalf of the respondents of the writ petition. In the petition it was prayed as follows: It is therefore prayed that your Lordships may be pleased to modify the order for payment of salaries to the petitioner passed on 23rd June, 1983 till the final disposed of this writ petition or pass any such order, orders as your Lordships may deem fit and proper.T It may be stated here f hat it was wrongly stated as 23rd July, 1983 in the prayer portion of the petition in place of 21st July, 1983. Though the modification sought for was not specifically stated in the petition, from the petition under submission the prayer appeared to be that the order of payment should be withdrawn. This appears from the order passed on this petition on 3rd September, 1983 in the writ application, when the petition was placed for orders. It will be useful to set out the order dated 3rd September, 1983 in extenso. An application has been filed to modify the order dated 21st July, 1983 whereby respondent No. 2 was directed to pay all arrears of salary by 21st of August, 1983, and the current salary forthwith. In this application by the State it is stated that the appointments of the petitioners were entirely illegal and collusively made by certain persons, which fact is clear from the enquiry report submitted by an officer belonging to the Indian Administrative Service, and a Deputy Collector and some of the officers of the department concerned have been suspended and F.I.R. has been lodged against all the petitioners. But the short-fall, according to the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners were pot noticed about the enquiry. It is well settled that a person howsoever illegally appointed cannot face termination- without being given an opportunity to show cause against such termination. Learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that no termination letter has been issued. The only thing is that the salary of the petitioners arrears and current-have been stopped which should be paid to the petitioners. As usual the department has chosen to violate the order passed by this Court on 21st July, 1983, by filing an application for modification of the said order, which is a sad reflection on the action of the executive and the officers in the concerned district. It is further stated by learned Counsel for the State that in case it is ultimately found that the teachers, i.e., the petitioners, were wrongly appointed, a large number of suits will have to be filed to recover the salaries paid to them and in this matter heavy burden wifi fall on the exchequer. As far as this Court is concerned, we follow the law and not repercussion of the action. The officers have to blame themselves for not following the law. If the officers of the State themselves act in a manner unwarranted in law, they would be dealt with suitably. Therefore, there is no merit in the submission. It has been further submitted that the present order virtually amounts to allowing the application. When the submissions are made view of the Court has to be expressed and that has been done, whatever may be the fate of the case itself. In the circumstances, the officers concerned are directed to comply with the earlier order immediately within fifteen days from today in the matter of the payment of the arrears and current months salary to the petitioners, failing which action will be taken under the Contempt of Courts Act.

(3.) Putting it in nutshell the submission was that since the petitioners so called appointments themselves, were obtained by fraud, they were not entitled to any payment whatsoever. In any event further extension of fifteen days was granted.