SAMUEL SOREN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

(2.) The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 7165(S) dated 12.11.2007 passed by the Secretary, Road Construction Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby the claim of the petitioner for payment of his salary from October 1990 to September, 2001 has been rejected and also for a direction upon the respondents to immediately and forthwith release the arrears of salary for the aforesaid period with interest.

(3.) This case has a chequered history. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Junior Engineer on 07.10.1983 in the Public Works Department (Road), Government of Bihar, Patna in pursuance to which he gave his joining at Road Division, Godda. The further case of the petitioner is that one Sri Mahadev Prasad Choubey, Junior Engineer was transferred by office order contained in Memo No. 33 dated 17.06.1987 and the petitioner was transferred by office order contained in Memo No. 94 dated 22.12.1987 however, at the instance of the Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road Division, Godda, the aforesaid office orders were cancelled by office order No. 38 contained in Memo No. 485 dated 12.03.1988 and the petitioner got his posting at Barahat Division under Road Division, Sahebganj (Annexure1 to the writ application), where the petitioner immediately gave his joining and he was being paid his salary from Sahebganj Division without any hindrance. Further case of the petitioner is that suddenly his salary from October, 1990 was stopped without assigning any reason and without considering the fact that he was discharging his duties regularly. Forced with this situation the petitioner filed a writ application before this Court which was registered as W.P.(S) No. 830 of 2003 for a direction to the respondents to pay him the arrears of salary from October, 1990 till the date of filing of the application. A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent in the said case stating that the Government of Bihar vide letter No. 2842 (S) dated 03.05.1989 transferred the portion of Godda-Pirpaiti Road of stretches Mile 6 to Mile 16 from Road Division, Sahebgunj to Road Division, Godda. This portion constitutes the entire section charge of Junior Engineer and the Executive Engineer; Sahebganj transferred the road along with the section to Godda Division and also relieved Sri Samuel Soren, Junior Engineer to join at Godda with specific direction to the petitioner because the entire section had been transferred to the Godda Division. But the petitioner did not join at Godda nor made any representation either to the Executive Engineer, Sahebganj or anywhere in the department including the Engineer-in-Chief. A government servant is entitled to pay only against the specific duties of work. Since the petitioner did not join at Godda and he was already relieved from Sahebganj, he is not entitled for the payment. It was only on 07.02.2001 that the petitioner made a representation to the Executive Engineer, Road Division, Sahebganj for payment. If the petitioner joined at Godda and start working he will get the salary since the petitioner's cadre controlling officer is Engineer-in-Chief. The Government is directing the Engineer-in-Chief to take appropriate decision for payment of the petitioner for the period of his absence. During the pendency of the writ application, a meeting was held under the Chairmanship of Engineer - in - Chief - cum -Additional Secretary -cumSpecial Secretary, Road Construction Department on 16.09.2005 and in pursuance to the decision taken therein the joining of the petitioner was accepted. The aforesaid writ application was disposed of by order dated 19.06.2007 by giving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before the Secretary, Road Construction Department, Jharkhand Ranchi within four weeks. It was also directed that the Secretary, Road Construction Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi will call for report/relevant documents from the concerned authorities and pass a speaking order in accordance with law. It was also directed that if any amount is found legally payable, the same must be paid and if any claim/part of it is found not payable the reasons must be communicated to the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of the representation. Since, the order dated 19.06.2007 was not complied, the petitioner filed a Cont. Case (Civil) No. 772 of 2007. A show cause was filed in Cont. Case (Civil) No. 772 of 2007 annexing an order contained in Memo No. 7165 (S) dated 12.11.2007 by which the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary from October 1990 to September, 2001 was rejected treating the petitioner to be on unauthorized absence during this period. The said order has been challenged in the instant writ application.