RISHISHWAR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was appointed as a teacher in the Project High School in terms of Annexure -1 and posted at High School, Kasmar in the district of Palamau. Subsequently he is supposed to have been transferred to Government Girls ' High School, Masaurhi where by virtue of Annexure -4 he gave his joining but the Principal of the transferred school vide letter dated 9.12.1994 refused to accept his joining on the ground that there was no vacant post in the school. The petitioner thereafter gave his joining on 12.12.1994 by virtue of Annexure -6 in the office of District Education Officer, Patna. The petitioner, while being posted at his last posting, received certain communications from the authority asking him to submit the original papers with regard to his appointment. This exercise started from 24.1.2001. The petitioner has brought on record a series of communications to show that the so -called enquiry has continued till date and despite submitting the necessary papers available with him in the year 2001, no final conclusion or decision has been taken by the competent authority. To make things worse even his salary has been stopped or is not being paid from January, 1998 till date. The petitioner continues to work as a teacher at Ajimchak School at Patna.

(2.) THE petitioner before this Court is aggrieved twice: first by the fact that from the year 2001 for almost four years the socalled enquiry into his original appointment comes without any conclusion being reached and secondly to make thing worse for him or his family even the salary since January, 1998 is not being paid to him. This Court on the face of the submission and record is concerned at the inaction on the part of the concerned authority. To conclude a sjmple matter of examination of record regarding the validity or otherwise of appointment of the petitioner, it is not explained as to why four years has not been enough to complete a simple enquiry. Further I do not see any order on record based on which the salary of the petitioner has been stopped. If the petitioner continues to work at his place of posting 'and has performed his duty, mere fact that the enquiry is going on against him to verify the authenticity of the document relating to his appointment, is not enough to deny his salary under the garb of so -called enquiry.

(3.) AFTER hearing the counsel for the petitioner as well as the State, this Court directs the respondents to take immediate step to conclude the so -called enquiry/ verification of the documents with regard to the appointment of the petitioner as a teacher in the Project School. This shall be done in the next three months. In so far as the stoppage of salary of the petitioner is concerned the authority shall take a decision to pay his salary after conclusion of enquiry. This Court however clarifies that if the respondents authorities hold against the petitioner in any manner and decide to pass an order it shall not come in the way of payment of salary for the period he has already been working in the school concerned. The order if at all shall only relate from the date it is passed and shall not have bearing on the entire period of work of the petitioner as such in his present place of posting.