LAWS(PAT)-2005-3-12

GRISHNATH DUBEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On March 23, 2005
GRISHNATH DUBEY Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order as contained in memo dated 27th of August, 2004 (Annexure-14) whereby the petitioner's adjustment as clerk by memo dated 8.7.1991 (Annexure-10), has been cancelled and excess salary paid to him on account of his adjustment as clerk has been directed to be recovered.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details facts giving ruse to the present application are that the petitioner's father was a teacher posted in Primary School and died while in service on 1.7.1980. Petitioner passed the Secondary School Examination, conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board, held in the year 1984 and thereafter, applied for appointment on compassionate ground. Prayer of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground was considered by the District Compassionate Committee in its meeting held on 2.9.1988 (Annexure-2) and it resolved to appoint him to a class IV post. In the light of the aforesaid resolution, by order as contained in memo dated 2.3.1989 (Annexure-3), petitioner was appointed as Peon and posted at Project Girls High School, Brahmpur in the district of Bhojpur. In the order of appointment, there was some error in regard to his surname which was lateron corrected by order as contained in memo dated 15.4.1989 (Annexure-4).

(3.) The petitioner although joined as Peon but later on represented before the authority for appointment to a class III post. The Deputy Director of Education, by its letter dated 10.8.1990 (Annexure-5), called for a report from the District Education Officer as to why petitioner was appointed as Peon and whether Class III posts were not available at that time. The District Education Officer, in response thereto, wrote to the Deputy Director of Education that petitioner was appointed as Peon on the recommendation of the District Compassionate Committee and as such, he is not in a position to assign the reason as to why he was appointed as such.