SHEO KUMAR MADHUR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the part of the order dated 19.03.2005 Annexure -6 para -5(Kh) whereby the respondent the Director, Primary Education, Jharkhand, Ranchi, has denied the arrear of salary for a period from 4.09.2004 to 09.02.2005 while asking him to obtain sanction of earned leave or commuted leave for the said period.

(3.) THE facts, which have been narrated hereinabove, are also borne out from the said order contained at Annexure -5. From perusal of the order specially the second last paragraph. It appears that this Court had indicated that subject to the decision of the Director, petitioner will join at Hapamuni. From the aforesaid observation, it is gathered that this Court while disposing of the said writ petition and in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances on record found that the petitioner had been continuing at his previous place of posting Ghaghra by virtue of the interim order passed on 30.08.2004 although he was transferred in between Ghaghra to Hapamuni, that is why this Court observed that the petitioner will join at Hapamuni subject to the decision of Director. The respondent -Director by his reasoned order revoked the said order dated 30.08.2004 relating to stay of transfer of other teacher Shankar Nath Singh as also the order of transfer dated 19.08.2004 in respect of the petitioner by which he was transferred to Hapamuni. It is indicated by the petitioner but not refuted by the respondent that after passing of the order dated 02.02.2005 in the earlier writ petition the petitioner submitted his joining on 10.02.2005 at Government Middle School, Hapamuni. However, the respondent -Director declined to release salary from 04.09.2004 to 09.02.2005 in respect of the petitioner as being not posted at any place and by refusing him to pay salary for the said period the Director asked him to seek sanction of earned leave or commuted leave for the said period.