KALI PADA DUTTA, Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) ALL these writs are taken together as common questions are involved in these writs and are being disposed of by a common order at the stage of admission itself.

(3.) THE questions aforesaid arose out of the facts that in all the writs the petitioners were appointed on the basis of the advertisement issued in the daily newspaper on 31.3.1981 for appointment of Assistant teachers. Consequently, all the thirteen petitioners of W.P.(S) No. 2395 of 2001 were appointed as Assistant teachers with effect from different dates in the year 1982 by Annexure -2 series. Then it appears that subsequent thereto all the petitioners of this writ were granted time bound promotion by Annexure -5 series. The time bound promotion was given to all the petitioners on the basis of a resolution adopted by the District Establishment Committee in the light of the resolution No. 10770 dated 30.12.1981 of the Finance Department. Similarly the petitioner of W.P.(S) No. 2362 of 2001, namely, Basant Saha was also appointed in the year 1982 by Annexure -2 and he was given time bound promotion by Annexure -4 in the aforesaid manner. Whereas all the petitioners of W.P.(S) No. 3995 of 2001, namely, Anant Kumar, Dinbandhu Bhattacharya and Banke Bihari Mishra were also appointed in the year 1982 by Annexure -1 series, and subsequently they were given time bound promotion by Annexure -8 series in the aforesaid manner. Then their pay was fixed in that higher scale but subsequently, vide memo No. 2231 dated 26.9.2000, (Annexure -7 of W.P.(S) No. 2395 of 2001, Annexure -9 of W.P.(S) No. 2362 of 2001 and Annexure -11 of W.P.(S) of No. 3995 of 2001) the time bound promotion given to all the petitioners was cancelled and further direction has been issued to recover the amount from the petitioners paid to them in excess due to such time bound promotion.