SMT. MANJU PANDEY AND SMT. RENU SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (HIGHER EDUCATION), GOVT. OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A supplementary affidavit, sworn by the Director, Higher Education, Government of Jharkhand on behalf of the Respondent -Stale of Jharkhand, has been filed, explaining that pursuant to the directions contained in the earlier order of this Court, a meeting of the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi with the Vice -Chancellor of the Ranchi University was held on 20.05.2010, at which the Director, Higher Education, Government of Jharkhand was also present. It was decided at the meeting that consequent upon the retirement of two teachers, namely, Sri R.N. Sharma, and Sri R. Choudhary, both Readers, who were earlier appointed in the B.V. Parikh Janata College, Jamshedpur and later transferred to the Simdega College and Bahragora College, Bahragora respectively, have since retired from the University service with effect from 31.07.2008 and 31.01.2008 respectively and considering the assurance given by the Finance Department of the Stale Government that there would be no financial burden in adjusting the Project Officers, namely, the present petitioners, against the vacancies created upon retirement of the aforesaid two Readers, both the present petitioners, namely Smt. Manju Pandey and Smt. Renu Singh, will be adjusted against the two vacant posts with effect from 21.03.2008 and 31.07.2008 and the payment of salary to them would be made from the date of assumption of their duties, pursuant to the promulgation and subsequent orders, received by the University. It was further decided that the petitioners would be paid in the replacement scale of Rs. 3,000 -5,000/ - on the basis of the previous scale received by them. It is also informed in the affidavit that a communication of the decision taken by the concerned authorities on 25.05.2010 has been sent to the concerned authorities as also to the present petitioners.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners would submit that considering the above decision finally taken by the Respondents, a major portion of the grievance of the petitioners, appears to have been redressed but the surviving grievance of the petitioners, is in respect of their claim for continuity of service and the consequential benefits arising thereof as well as their claim for payment of arrears of salary, which has been withheld ever since 01.04.2000.

(3.) WITH the positive expectation that the Respondents -authorities would redress the surviving grievance of the petitioners mentioned above within the stipulated time and there being no further need to retain this writ application on Board, the same is accordingly, disposed of, with the above observations.