TIKAM RAM Vs. RANCHI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application the petitioner originally prayed for quashing the order as contained in Memo No. RU/3161, dated 18.1.2000 whereby the services of the petitioner as Estate Officer has been terminated with effect from 22.2.2000. By an amendment in the writ application the petitioner has further challenged the office order dated 16.2.2000 whereby the representation filed by the petitioner has been rejected and the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Estate Officer was declared as fake and further the petitioner was reverted to his previous post of Laboratory Technician in the Post Graduate Department of Psychology.

(2.) PETITIONERS case is that he was initially appointed as Lab. incharge in Marwari College. Ranchi in the year 1978. The said College was made constituent in or about the year 1980 -81. The petitioner was then transferred and posted in the P.G. Department of Psychology. It is alleged that by Memo No. 1732, dated 9th October, 1982 the Education Department of the State Government approved the creation of one post of an Estate Officer at the Office of Ranchi University. After creation of the post of Estate Officer, the same was filled up by promotion. However, in 1991 the Ranchi University invited applications through advertisement for appointment to the post of Estate Officer from non -teaching employees of the Ranchi University. The Selection Committee so constituted for this purpose forwarded the names of three candidates who were found suitable for being appointed on the post of Estate Officer. The name of the petitioner appeared at Serial No. 1 of the said recommendation. Ultimately by a notification dated 14.3.1991 the petitioner was appointed as an Estate Officer of the Ranchi University in the revised pay scale of Rs. 2,000 - -3,800 and the petitioner joined the post on 16.3.1999. Subsequently, in the gradation list issued by the University vide notification dated 15.4.1999 the name of the petitioner appeared at Serial No. 186 showing his appointment as Estate Officer.

(3.) A counter -affidavit has been filed by the respondents -Ranchi University. The respondents case is that the case of the petitioner and other 57 employees of the University has been the subject -matter of consideration of the State of Bihar regarding the validity of their appointment. The State Government by letter dated 28.12.1999 directed the University to take action against those persons who were appointed/promoted against non -existing posts and further to cancel such appointment and promotion. When no action was taken by the University, the State Government again asked the University to show -cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against the officers of the University and why recommendations be not sent to the Chancellor for realisation of the amount paid to the said persons. It is further stated that the State Government has been repeatedly intimating to the Ranchi University while sanctioning grants that the appointment/ promotion in respect of 57 persons would be immediately cancelled. Respondents further case is that the petitioner was appointed as Estate Officer on the strength of the State Governments letter No. 67, dated 17.1.1983. The existence of such letter No. 67 dated 17.1.1983 has been denied and disputed by the State Government and the same has been declared to be fake document. It is contended that in the light of the direction of the State Government, the services of the petitioner to the post of Estate Officer has been terminated as the appointment was void ab initio. The representation filed by the petitioner against the termination of the service as Estate Officer was considered by the University and it was found that the petitioner was appointed against a post which was declared fake and the same was never sanctioned by the State Government. The respondents -University has, therefore, no option but to revert the petitioner to his previous post of lab -technician in the P.G. Department of Psychology. Ranchi University.