AMAR ARCHAR TUDU Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant intra-court appeal preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the orders/judgment dtd. 15/12/2020 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No. 449 of 2015, whereby and whereunder, the decision of the authority as contained in notification no. 41 of 2014 dtd. 20/6/2014, by which the writ petitioner had been reverted to Class-IV post in the scale of Rs.2500.00 3200 him from the post of clerk, has been refused to be interfered with by dismissing the writ petition.

(2.) The brief facts of the lis as per the pleading which are required to be enumerated, read as hereunder: The writ petitioner had applied for appointment on compassionate ground on the ground of death of the bread earner who died in harness. The bread earner of the writ petitioner who was in the regular service in establishment of the respondent-University. The writ petitioner had made application for appointment on compassionate ground. His case was send before the District Compassionate Committee. The Committee convened a meeting on 7/7/2012 under the Chairmanship of Vice Chancellor and other seven members of the Committee. The case of the writ petitioner was recommended for appointment in Class-III post (LDC) in the pay scale of Rs.4000.006000/-. The writ petitioner joined the service in the Deoghar College on 13/10/2012 and started discharging his duties.The respondent-Vice Chancellor issued a notification being Notification No. 41 of 2014 dtd. 20/6/2014 in supersession to the earlier notification No.110 of 2012 dtd. 6/10/2012 by which the writ petitioner had been appointed in the Class-III post, has now been reverted to Class-IV post. The writ petitioner, being aggrieved with the aforesaid order, approached to this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(S) No.449 of 2015 on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice as also the appointment since made out on due recommendation of the compassionate committee should not have been modified by reverting the writ petitioner from Class-III to Class-IV post. The respondents have appeared and contested the case by taking the plea therein that appointment on compassionate ground of the writ petitioner since has not been approved by the State Government, therefore, such decision has been taken. According to the respondent- University, decision of the State Government is the final authority to approve the appointment made under the University even on the compassionate ground. The learned Single Judge on appreciation of the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the University, in pursuance to the provision of Sec. 35 of the Jharkhand University Act, 2000, has got no authority, whatsoever, to create fresh financial liability for the Government by making appointment even on compassionate ground without prior approval of the State Government since the entire fund for making payment to the officers and the employees of the University comes from the State Government. No payment of salary can be made to the employees appointed till their appointment is ultimately approved by the State Government and funds are made available to the University for payment of their salary. Further, Sec. 5 of the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission Act, 2008 has also been considered, whereby and whereunder, the appointment to the Class-III/Grade-C posts is to be made on the basis of the recommendation of the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission but having not done so by the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, so far as the appointment of the writ petitioner is concerned, action of the University by reverting the writ petitioner in Class-IV post has been declined to be interfered with.

(3.) Mr. Durga C. Mishra, learned counsel for the writ petitioner has submitted that the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition by considering the provision as contained under Sec. 35 of the Jharkhand University Act, 2000 which at all is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case, reason being that Sec. 35 stipulates that no post for appointment shall be created without prior sanction of the State Government, but here, there is no question of creation of post either under Class-IV or Class-III rather appointment on compassionate ground is to be made against the sanctioned post and once the appointment has been made by the University concerned against the sanctioned post, there is no question of applicability of the provision of Sec. 35 of the Act, 2000.